Support NeoGAF

[Mibu no ookami]

Honestly, we won't know if Bungie was a good buy for a long time. It's not a simple purchase like the Bethesda deal.

We don't know what Bungie has given Sony in terms of live service experience, but another untold factor of this is that the move can be seen as a defensive one.

Microsoft buying Bungie and Bungie returning to Halo may have been a major lifeline for Xbox and Halo and where we see them going 3rd party now, might not have gone down as soon or at all. The billions of dollars Sony will get from being the sole premium console manufacturer can't be understated or ignored.

Would a Bungie-made Halo have actually made a difference? Who knows, but it isn't going to happen now and the reality is that it COULD have at least powered them through to the next generation with the promise of maybe this game at launch for the next console.

 

[Perrott]

So buying Bingie, a Live Service developer, was NOT an increase in Live Service investment.

It was only a testament to how invested they were into their live-service strategy as of spring 2022, because that's when the purchase of Bungie was made, but it took longer than the date of Sony's IR day 2022 to be finalized, so the budget that'd have to be allocated to them wasn't included until the IR day 2023 PDF.

That's what I've been trying to tell you: that the live-service budget percentage being higher in 2023 compared to 2022 doesn't necesarilly mean that Sony were more invested into live-services by then (when in fact, by that point, they were already starting to cancel live-service projects) but that they had just started to account for the costs of running Bungie.

One last thing though. I've brought up Hiroki Titokis quote about their Live Service strategy remaining unchanged now and, for some reason, you failed to address it. Is it because it hurts the narrative?

Because that's a fact, evident by how they're still invested in, again, Helldivers II support, MLB The Show, Concord, Fairgame$, Horizon: Hunters Gathering, Marathon, Blundell's new game... nothing to argue against Totoki's quote, because it is clear as day that live-service isn't going away. I guess that my entire point, and going back to my original comment, was just pointing out the nuance in that they don't seem to be as bullish about their strategy and upcoming lineup as they were two years ago because, as it should also be clear by now, said strategy has for better or for worse been scaled down going by how there's simply going to be fewer games as part of it than originally intended.

And I also want to point out that I'm not identifying myself with either side of the narrative in regards to Sony's live-service push. I hope for the best from both worlds, which speaking personally about the live-service side, well: The Last Of Us Online and Twisted Metal were some of the games I was looking forward to the most before they got cancelled: Helldivers II seems incredible and probably is one of Sony's top 3 titles so far in this generation (but right now I don't have the time to get into it, unfortunately); I'm super intrigued about Concord; and I believe Fairgame$ has the most potential out of all Sony live-services going by the caliber of the talent working on it and all the great buzz coming out of Haven.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Colin drops a few more clinically insane takes regarding Bungie...



- Fabricates a list of "data" composing of 15 studios that were cheaper to buy than Bungie. The other two hosts fail to mention that his combined list never made a franchise as successful as Destiny, which continues to generate exceptional revenue.

- Fabricates a story of another buyer sniffing around which made Sony spend 3.6B dollars without doing their due diligence.

- Says Sony is no longer pursuing GAAS despite Sony continuing to pursue GAAS.

Why does this bother me so much? Is it time for Men_in_Boxes to look inward?

Colin has some really stupid, knee jerk takes and this is one of them

Sony overpaying and Bungie being a bad investment are two different things.

Anyone that bought high in early 2022 “overpaid”. Sony should have purchased Bungie assuming a 45% drop in revenue was possible. Some studios, like SSM, have a 100% loss of revenue if a game like their new PS4 IP was cancelled. You don’t give up on them though.

Good studios find a way to turn things around. I believe Bungie is still a good studio. Sony should have purchased them caring about what their revenue is in 2030+ with some hiccups along the way

 

[Shubh_C63]

Sell Bungie ? Bad idea. 3.6B was overkill everyone agreed but its already done.

No matter how you look at it, Bungie team is talented, no other way to put it.
Lets talk again once new expansion drops and player count is back to Witch Queen levels or above.

 

[Sleepwalker]

Just have bungie actually make a game, even if its Destiny 3 or whatever.

Not sure Marathon will be a big hit.

 

[FeralEcho]

There's so many brilliant things said in this 8 minute segment that you really need to hear it for yourself. Colin has found some high quality games reporting and is really extrapolating some profound thoughts. I'm surprised a large publisher hasn't offered him a job as their CEO yet.

The seething beneath the thin layer of sarcasm that I can feel in every word of this post is almost palpable

Men_in_Boxes to Colin

 

[WitchHunter]

That guy deserves some psycho analysis... Anyways, he got hooked on his own fart smell. Jesus, someone put him in a triangle choke. Then give him a roundhouse kick.

 

[StueyDuck]

I mean... I don't know how anyone here could say bungie was a good purchase , he's not entirely wrong, sure is he hyperbolic, yes. But buying bungie was a dumb arse knee jerk reaction to MSs consolidation spree.

Marathon might do ok but this isn't the destiny days anymore, everyone and their uncle is releasing some live service battle royale/extraction shooter. The market is saturated, marathon would need to be extra special to make a splash.

 

[Badlucktroll]

I was hoping they would make a big single player FPS rpg

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

It was only a testament to how invested they were into their live-service strategy as of spring 2022, because that's when the purchase of Bungie was made, but it took longer than the date of Sony's IR day 2022 to be finalized, so the budget that'd have to be allocated to them wasn't included until the IR day 2023 PDF.

That's what I've been trying to tell you: that the live-service budget percentage being higher in 2023 compared to 2022 doesn't necesarilly mean that Sony were more invested into live-services by then (when in fact, by that point, they were already starting to cancel live-service projects) but that they had just started to account for the costs of running Bungie.

I see your point and it's certainly plausible. Sony announced plans to buy Bungie in January of 2022 but were not confident enough to list that investment 3 months later in May of 2022 in their segment briefings.

As possible as that is, it still shows a Sony who was planning on allocating 55% of their resources into Live Service around that time, pushing further into GAAS by buying a 3.6B dollar LS developer in Bungie. The larger trend still shows an increase in investment.

Because that's a fact, evident by how they're still invested in, again, Helldivers II support, MLB The Show, Concord, Fairgame$, Horizon: Hunters Gathering, Marathon, Blundell's new game... nothing to argue against Totoki's quote, because it is clear as day that live-service isn't going away. I guess that my entire point, and going back to my original comment, was just pointing out the nuance in that they don't seem to be as bullish about their strategy and upcoming lineup as they were two years ago because, as it should also be clear by now, said strategy has for better or for worse been scaled down going by how there's simply going to be fewer games as part of it than originally intended.

The short term strategy has been scaled down as evidenced by Titokis quote. The mid and long term strategy has not, as evidenced by Titokis quote.

But reading your response here, it does seem like you may not agree with Colin, who seems to greatly exaggerate the shift away from GAAS and is willing to judge a 3.6B dollar investment in Bungie before they release a single new game.

Again, his Bungie take is 100% fabrication as he has no information on the inner workings of the acquisition. Sony spent months kicking the tires with a team of highly paid professionals. The idea that they were blindsided by Lightfalls underperformance seems dubious at best. Gamers were likely the last to know there.

And I also want to point out that I'm not identifying myself with either side of the narrative in regards to Sony's live-service push. I hope for the best from both worlds, which speaking personally about the live-service side, well: The Last Of Us Online and Twisted Metal were some of the games I was looking forward to the most before they got cancelled: Helldivers II seems incredible and probably is one of Sony's top 3 titles so far in this generation (but right now I don't have the time to get into it, unfortunately); I'm super intrigued about Concord; and I believe Fairgame$ has the most potential out of all Sony live-services going by the caliber of the talent working on it and all the great buzz coming out of Haven.

May 2024 can't get here soon enough.

 

[Negotiator101]

Barely get a billion for them now.

 

[FingerBang]

Just have bungie actually make a game, even if its Destiny 3 or whatever.

Not sure Marathon will be a big hit.

I agree. They need to drop D2 and move on to the next thing. Which is 100% in development.

There is potential for more Destiny or something similar. The issue is with a product that is inaccessibile for new players and too big for its own good. It shouldn't have lasted 7 years.

Selling Bungie now would just be a mistake