Support NeoGAF

[Amiga]

Very little value without the IP. barley worth half a billion. Most of their developers are dependent on Unreal Engine. So not even a lot of high value programmers.

The content and game design at Rocksteady and Nether Realms are great though. Pulse the mo-cap and animation guys.

 

[onesvenus]

Most of their developers are dependent on Unreal Engine. So not even a lot of high value programmers.

Lol

 

[Amiga]

Lol

AFAIK NetherRealm and Rocksteady use Unreal Engine.

 

[reinking]

Nice try pal, but im not the one pushing anything at all. Who am i persuading with what ? Im noticing how the pretense of not wanting consolidating usually comes from a very specific place. So what if one invested in playstation until now ? Nobody is taking that away. There's no preference of genres involved, the dozens of studios under microsoft right now are making ALL genres. Im just noticing the self sabotaging of certain individuals and finding it very odd and lacking sense since getting another console is quite a simple and unintrusive affair. My specific remarks are for those people that would prefer to NEVER in their entire life play games of any kind if its not on playstation. Those arent gamers who like games - thats a cult like behaviour.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

You don't even need a Xbox just get a decent gaming PC Desktop or even Laptop
& use Steam all MS games goes on Steam day 1 now
This is why i have zero problem with Sony or MS buying more game studios
i will just buy both and not have to worry if the game Devs that i like is going exclusive or not

You're still missing my point. It's not about not being able to play a certain game because it's on a certain box. It's about how as large platform holders/publishers continue to buy up smaller publishers and studios, the collective output of games under their new owner is going to undoubtedly be less than what output those publishers & studios would've made if they remained on their own, independent.

Because they won't need to ensure a certain higher quota anymore (since they have a permanent financer in the form of the platform holder or publisher who owns them), they may not get budget for the same amount (or potentially the same type) of games they'd of been able to secure funding for if they remained independent. The companies making these acquisitions have to eventually start making their money back threefold, they're eventually going to enter a period where they try minimizing spending and maximizing profit.

The easiest means of them to do that is to scale down the total amount of projects they have to fund at a given time. That's why I said three companies producing 15 games each while independent (or 45 games in total) could drop down to them each doing 5-7 games simultaneously instead (or 15 to 21 games in total). They're all getting funding from the same financer, and there is no financer around with infinite money.

I would actually think sony would have a harder time purching a publicly traded company/publisher then ms would. Considering how as of 2021 still the largest game publisher. Even after ms purchases AB. That was before the studio purchases made this year by sony.

It's actually not just the gaming divisions being looked at here, though. The actual parent companies are and in that respect MS have already leveraged their corporate size to buy ABK. The Xbox division on its own would've never been able to do that, same with the PS division within Sony.

So that shows these companies are willing to leverage their other divisions and resources to push for gaming acquisitions that increase their market share. And it's the fact companies as a whole, rather than just their gaming divisions, are driving these purchases, that raises those concerns. It's definitely something things like the FTC and DOJ will be considering a lot more going forward.

> Sony hosting a State of Play for Hogwart's Legacy.

> Jim Ryan mentioning Mortal Kombat among a list of first-party games as one of the games to launch with PS+ Spartacus

> Gregg and Grubb saying Sony is making a big acquisition that's easily bigger than Kojima Productions.

Oh snap indeed. "Interesting" coincidences...aside the last one. I don't really care what these insiders say when it comes to acquisitions.

That said tho, they're still just coincidences. Wouldn't read too much into 'em.

 

[rickybooby87]

Honestly at this point, a MS acquisition is probably off the table, at least until Activision clears regulatory approval.

 

[yurinka]

I know they they don't need gp or xbox live to bring games to PS. But that's the justification he'll use to explain why they're exclusive. Once again he's said exactly this years ago

You keep bringing up deathloop and ghostwire as examples like they're relevent. They're not. They're contractual obligations and we have yet to see any new game that falls outside of those announced for PS. It was already established for both that they'll honour existing deals.

What they've said about ActiBlizz games which is conpletely different to Bethesda is they'll continue to release games BEYOND those obligations. That's the 180

If you think it's going to be;

New IP = xbox exclusive

Existing IP = multiplatform

Then that's just naivity

I keep bringing them because they are facts: things they did and things that match what they said they will do.

You claim they will do something they never said they would do and doesn't match with what they did until now in all their released games: to go full exclusive for all the games not covered by pre acquisition deals.

They never said for Bethesda or Activision that their support for the other platforms is going to be limited to the games covered by pre acquisition deals. People like you always wanted to mix these two things when they are two separated things. One is to honor existing deals. And a separate one is their will to continue releasing games, dlc and so on in the other platforms.

The 180 is only in your mind:

- For Bethesda their Xbox Chief of Finantial Operation said specifically and clearly that their plans for Bethesda wasn't to make their games exclusive but instead the first (temporal exclusive) or better (day one multiplatform) on Xbox. MS never said that it was wrong or that they changed their mind and all the future Bethesda games were going to be exclusive.

-For Activision Blizzard when explaining in the legally binding document for investors and regulator of the SEC filling that they will continue releasing their main IPs on other consoles mentioned Minecraft a example of this: series where they released a couple of games and a lot of dlcs and updates several years after being acquired by MS. The MS president also said this and this. Phil also said on his Twitter they want to keep CoD on PS. And again, after that they never said that these things were wrong or that they changed their mind.

All their wording regarding to keep games on PS was often related to existing franchises or "communities" or at least the main ones. So Starfield instead of being a rare exception in a plan where the big majority of their games would be multiplatform or timed console exclusivities could also mean that this idea of to keep releasing games on rival consoles doesn't apply for new IPs.

It isn't naivity, it's finding a way to match their action with their words if we think they weren't lying when talking about their full strategy for these companies. Another option would be to think that instead of being lying for all their future games of their companies, they only lied when said that Starfield won't be a timed console exclusivity.

 

[skit_data]

Is it too expensive for Embracer Group, or would it be possible for them to acquire WB Games?

 

[Alphagear]

Is it too expensive for Embracer Group, or would it be possible for them to acquire WB Games?

They have 8 billion to spend on acquisitions i believe so well within their budget.

 

[Solarstrike]

So no more Middle Earth? Was hoping for a Shadow's (or Rise) of Angmar...

 

[onesvenus]

AFAIK NetherRealm and Rocksteady use Unreal Engine.

Someone using unreal engine doesn't make them bad programmers

 

[Amiga]

Someone using unreal engine doesn't make them bad programmers

It means they don't have in-house technical capabilities that are of value to buyers. their value is in game design. that is valuable in itself, just a different value with a different price.
The opposite is with a company like Ubisoft. they have tons of good programmers that urn out tons of games and content. but their game design is $#1t, not interested in anything they make.

 

[Notabueno]

Good, Warner Bros. are the biggest tasteless couch potato douche of the whole entertainment industry. Oh and their endorsement of domestic abuse with the Depp-Heard case...?

Anyway, after how much their douche bros execs boasted about the "Serververse" in Space Jam, I'm surprised they'd want to sell the single most important long-term position.

Everybody is so fucking afraid of the video game bubble...

 

[Craig of War]

Did you even read what I wrote? I said at some point MS will be blocked from buying anymore publishers and studios. Once they aquire AB they will be larger than Sony.
Also MS take profits from other divisions to help them become dominant in another.
MS got too many other tech giants up against them who will be complaining to the FTC just like MS has about them.

FTC is a clown show nothing will happen

 

[Craig of War]

Let's see what happens? When and if MS remove mainline COD from PS platforms. Then we'll see the fallout.
One I don't see MS going out buying anymore publishers. Maybe some studios.
After AB deal closes MS will be scrutinised even more closely.

Nope nothing will happen lol

 

[Craig of War]

You're still missing my point. It's not about not being able to play a certain game because it's on a certain box. It's about how as large platform holders/publishers continue to buy up smaller publishers and studios, the collective output of games under their new owner is going to undoubtedly be less than what output those publishers & studios would've made if they remained on their own, independent.

Because they won't need to ensure a certain higher quota anymore (since they have a permanent financer in the form of the platform holder or publisher who owns them), they may not get budget for the same amount (or potentially the same type) of games they'd of been able to secure funding for if they remained independent. The companies making these acquisitions have to eventually start making their money back threefold, they're eventually going to enter a period where they try minimizing spending and maximizing profit.

The easiest means of them to do that is to scale down the total amount of projects they have to fund at a given time. That's why I said three companies producing 15 games each while independent (or 45 games in total) could drop down to them each doing 5-7 games simultaneously instead (or 15 to 21 games in total). They're all getting funding from the same financer, and there is no financer around with infinite money.

I Disagree

 

[Shmunter]

MS majority vote by a large margin, however MS hands are tied atm awaiting Activision approval into 2023. Buying anything now would jeopardise that deal into the future so can’t see that personally.

I really hope it’s not anyone that would lock up exclusivity.

Looking closer it’s just the studios, not the ip’s - making this far less attractive than it seems. Of course it could come with an IP licensing deal built in for a good period of time.

 

[onesvenus]

It means they don't have in-house technical capabilities that are of value to buyers

No, it doesn't mean that.

Does CDPR not have technical capability because they are using UE5 after using their in-house engine for Cyberpunk and The Witcher?
Does The Coalition not have technical capability when they have greatly contributed to UE5?

Most of the studios using UE5 use a custom build of it tailored to their needs. That needs technical capabilities

 

[Amiga]

No, it doesn't mean that.

Does CDPR not have technical capability because they are using UE5 after using their in-house engine for Cyberpunk and The Witcher?
Does The Coalition not have technical capability when they have greatly contributed to UE5?

Most of the studios using UE5 use a custom build of it tailored to their needs. That needs technical capabilities

Programing factors into a studios price. CDPR surly lost a ton of value after they demonstrated lack of independent capability.

 

[MonarchJT]

Ok bye, I won't get into this with you if you are not going to stand by what you wrote and pretend that I'm making it up when everyone can still go there and read it.

I play mostly on PC yet I know multiple people that play only on a Switch or only on a PlayStation and are more than ok with that and don't think that they are missing out on anything or that they should go out an buy an Xbox because of how big MS is or how many publishers it has acquired.

when u don't miss anything don't playing games from the highest rated publisher of the year ....and at the same time you consider these people passionate about video games a fan of video games well yes there is a problem. However, there are also a lot of people who only have the xbox and doesn't give a damn about the PlayStation. even these if they will say "nothing is missing from their experience" are lying.
Ms will soon have 35 studios ...they own the best wrpg makers and practically all the top FPS studios ... turn10 and playground are also among the best studios in the world of video games as regards car racing games. It is not a war list but simply showing how "don't miss anything" is just a lie to live better (applies to both positions)

 

[Snake29]

when u don't miss anything don't playing games from the highest rated publisher of the year ....and at the same time you consider these people passionate about video games a fan of video games well yes there is a problem. However, there are also a lot of people who only have the xbox and doesn't give a damn about the PlayStation. even these if they will say "nothing is missing from their experience" are lying.
Ms will soon have 35 studios ...they own the best wrpg makers and practically all the top FPS studios ... turn10 and playground are also among the best studios in the world of video games as regards car racing games. It is not a war list but simply showing how "don't miss anything" is just a lie to live better (applies to both positions)

If we are talking about this generation. I think people are kinda right that you aren’t missing anything outside Halo and Forza. The first one wasn’t that great overall and was way overhyped. Forza 5…another instalment in the series but wasn’t that much different over H4. So what else did we really missed?

You can go around being a marketing guy nice telling people what they will have in the future, how many studios they have but at the moment we see very little of it. Soon we will be 2 years further and xbox has hardly released anything that was really interesting. So I give people the right of way when they say that at the moment they hardly miss anything on the xbox.

 

[MonarchJT]

If we are talking about this generation. I think people are kinds right that you aren’t missing anything outside Halo and Forza. The first one wasn’t that great overall and was way overhyped. Forza 5…another instalment in the series but wasn’t that much different over H4. So what else did we really missed?

You can go around being a marketing guy nice telling people what they will have in the future, how many studios they have but at the moment we see very little of it. Soon we will be 2 years further and xbox has hardly released anything that was really interesting. So I give people the right of way when they say that at the moment they hardly miss anything on the xbox.

This generation has started slower than usual due to Covid but we know which and how many games will come Starfield, Motorsport, hellblade 2 are behind the door. Same "argument" could be said for most playstation games miles morales was basically a dlc for spiderman PS4 ..horizon hasnt changed a lot (if not graphically exactly as forza 5) compared to the first PS4 game ... Demons soul is basically a graphical update of the exact same game.... ecc ecc ..... I don't think that what you are writing makes sense. The generation is long and already with Psychonauts 2, Flight sim, Forza h5, and Halo infinite .... "you're missing something"

 

[Snake29]

This generation has started slower than usual due to Covid but we know which and how many games will come Starfield, Motorsport, hellblade 2 are behind the door. Same "argument" could be said for most playstation games miles morales was basically a dlc for spiderman PS4 ..horizon hasnt changed a lot (if not graphically exactly as forza 5) compared to the first PS4 game ... Demons soul is basically a graphical update of the exact same game.... ecc ecc ..... I don't think that what you are writing makes sense. The generation is long and already with Psychonauts 2, Flight sim, Forza h5, and Halo infinite .... "you're missing something"

If people are not missing anything, that means they are not interested. I’m not interested in buying a Switch, so i don’t care about their games atm and i’m not missing anything. But at the same time, Nintendo has still more to offer for a lot of people then MS has released in the last 4/5 years.

I get that you like to shout that Miles was a DLC, and Forbidden West was nothing more than Zero Dawn, and Demon Souls was nothing more than a graphical update. People only say that when they want to reinforce their point because they know that on their own side the grass is not greener, which makes you try to feel better with such comments.

I don't care if people aren't interested in a playstation or something, but you don't have to tell other people that they're lying.

 

[MonarchJT]

If people are not missing anything, that means they are not interested. I’m not interested in buying a Switch, so i don’t care about their games atm and i’m not missing anything. But af the same time, Nintendo has still more to offer for a lot of people then MS has released in the last 4/5 years.

subjective. Then you go back saying that Ninty objectively does offer more ... But it seem so subjective again .. what yardstick do you use? before you say quality I remind you that Ms as pub of the year with the highest rated games. Listen to me, I want to be democratic and impartial ...nowadays there no single platform of the big tree that isn't doing good things... and is objectively true saying that if you own just one of those platform you are missing something good.

 

[Darth_Ghandi]

Whoever buys should keep the games multiplat.
No idea why people don’t want others to play games.

 

[ksdixon]

I want Sony to end up with NRS and MK and DC licenses. Cut through some of the red tape involved. "Hey Capcom/Marvel, how bout MVC4, MVDC, MKvsSF etc."

 

[zedinen]

You read to much into those fake articles used bait for clicks
FTC won't do nothing i guarantee it

With ATVI shares trading 25% below Microsoft's offer ... what are you waiting for?

We talking about gaming and gaming only
MS gaming division Xbox is not a behemoth in gaming it in 3rd place lol
Tencent is bigger in the gaming space than MS so is Sony
All these monopoly nonsense need to stop

China accounts for 80% of Tencent gaming revenue. American and european regulators couldn't care less about market concentration in China and its biggest beneficiary.

Sony is a platform holder with a low level of vertical integration, basically designed to fill the gap left by independent publishers (third-person action-adventure games). As a result, Sony's publishing arm has no answer for Call of Duty, Diablo, FIFA, Fortnite, GTA, The Witcher ...

Microsoft is trying to gain control over the entire industry through massive horizontal and vertical integration.

if the deal goes through, Microsoft, a platform holder with deep pockets, will be a bigger publisher than EA and Take Two combined (or Nintendo and Sony combined) and leapfrog Sony's revenue in America.

This is the starting point for american and european regulatory agencies.

I don't know how the regulatory stuff works so I don't know if MS has to wait to complete the ABK acquisition, but I assume that at least they could make secretly all negotiations and reach an agreement of acquisition that could be announced shortly after completing the ABK acquisition if legally required.

The Neobrandeisians oppose modern antitrust laws that are based on the Chicago School's consumer welfare standard, and advocate that antitrust laws should promote not welfare but competitive markets.

Lina Khan, the FTC chair, is a neobrandeisian. She believes that concentration begets concentration, monopolies and oligopolies can inflict a host of harms, and that Big Tech companies corner different markets and then leverage the power gained from one market to dominate another.

Monopolies and oligopolies are bad for the economy.

Multiple monopolies and oligopolies run by the same five corporations are a nightmare.


In this particular case, Microsoft announced plans to buy two publishers and several other studios for $80 billion. Where did the money came from?

Nintendo cumulative net profit is roughly $27 billion after 40 years …

Since Microsoft started a full-scale acquisition war, SIE has acquired Insomniac, Bungie, Housemarque, Bluepoint, Firesprite, Haven, Nixxes and Valkyrie.

If regulators don't stop Microsoft Corporation, Sony Group will end up helping SIE and things will get ugly for publishers, developers and gamers.

EVs are tanking

CD Projekt $2.78 billion
Square Enix $3.65 billion
Capcom $4.88 billion
Ubisoft $5.73 billion
Take Two $11.58 billion


Having said that, Microsoft is the most powerful corporation in the world and antitrust laws are outdated. It’s probably 50/50.

If Embracer can buy anyone and everyone they please, there's no reason other companies shouldn't be able to do the same.

Yet for some reason MS gets called out as the special child, while everyone around them is doing the same or worse

Embracer Enterprise Value

SEK 62.66B ($6.37 billion)

 

[reksveks]

As a result, Sony's publishing arm has no answer for Call of Duty, Diablo, FIFA, Fortnite, GTA, The Witcher ...

For now, that aint going to be true in 1/2 years

 

[Hezekiah]

If people are not missing anything, that means they are not interested. I’m not interested in buying a Switch, so i don’t care about their games atm and i’m not missing anything. But at the same time, Nintendo has still more to offer for a lot of people then MS has released in the last 4/5 years.

I get that you like to shout that Miles was a DLC, and Forbidden West was nothing more than Zero Dawn, and Demon Souls was nothing more than a graphical update. People only say that when they want to reinforce their point because they know that on their own side the grass is not greener, which makes you try to feel better with such comments.

I don't care if people aren't interested in a playstation or something, but you don't have to tell other people that they're lying.

Agreed, I mentioned the Nintendo thing earlier, I don't feel like I'm missing anything as I just dont have the interest.

As regards WRPGs, Playstation will be getting Witcher 4, Santa Monica are working on an RPG under Cory Barlog, Horizon is basically an action RPG...then you look at JRPGs and Sony have Final Fantasy (and other SE games) and Persona on lock. I know Bethesda are very popular, but we have to be honest and say their last couple of games have not been very good, and even their best often launch is a very buggy state.

FPS - well CoD is staying multiplatform, as of course is Battlefield is. Now Sony are getting Bungie so Destiny will likely be added to PS+, as will be their new IP, then you have shooters coming from Firewalk, and from Deviation Games.

MS will have 32 studios, but if you look at the Activision Blizzard acquisition, most of the franchises their are much more PC-centric.

The reality is most grown-up people are lucky if they get 10 - 15 hours a week for gaming. It's always nice to own several platforms, but Playstation as one example has more than enough content, and the breadth of games to keep anyone satisfied, and you can have it as your only platform and not really miss anything.

 

[Badlucktroll]

Phil bout to get Mortal Kombat aint he!?

 

[Ganondolf]

im sure Microsoft would love to pick up some of the studios but dont think they can till Activision deal goes through. does not stop them negotiating for a future (post activision) purchase.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I keep bringing them because they are facts: things they did and things that match what they said they will do.

You claim they will do something they never said they would do and doesn't match with what they did until now in all their released games: to go full exclusive for all the games not covered by pre acquisition deals.

They never said for Bethesda or Activision that their support for the other platforms is going to be limited to the games covered by pre acquisition deals. People like you always wanted to mix these two things when they are two separated things. One is to honor existing deals. And a separate one is their will to continue releasing games, dlc and so on in the other platforms.

The 180 is only in your mind:

- For Bethesda their Xbox Chief of Finantial Operation said specifically and clearly that their plans for Bethesda wasn't to make their games exclusive but instead the first (temporal exclusive) or better (day one multiplatform) on Xbox. MS never said that it was wrong or that they changed their mind and all the future Bethesda games were going to be exclusive.

-For Activision Blizzard when explaining in the legally binding document for investors and regulator of the SEC filling that they will continue releasing their main IPs on other consoles mentioned Minecraft a example of this: series where they released a couple of games and a lot of dlcs and updates several years after being acquired by MS. The MS president also said this and this. Phil also said on his Twitter they want to keep CoD on PS. And again, after that they never said that these things were wrong or that they changed their mind.

All their wording regarding to keep games on PS was often related to existing franchises or "communities" or at least the main ones. So Starfield instead of being a rare exception in a plan where the big majority of their games would be multiplatform or timed console exclusivities could also mean that this idea of to keep releasing games on rival consoles doesn't apply for new IPs.

It isn't naivity, it's finding a way to match their action with their words if we think they weren't lying when talking about their full strategy for these companies. Another option would be to think that instead of being lying for all their future games of their companies, they only lied when said that Starfield won't be a timed console exclusivity.

Not sure what else to tell you then. It's blatantly obvious if you bother to actually read what they've said after the deal went through. Not the PR bullshit they were spouting beforehand.

Here's another from Phil, once again after the deal went through

"Obviously I can't sit here and say every Bethesda game is [an Xbox] exclusive, because we know that's not true," he explained. "There's contractual obligations that we're going to see through. We have games that exist on other platforms and we're going to go and support those games on the platforms they're on. There's communities of players - we love those communities and will continue to invest in them - and even in the future there might be...either contractual things or legacy on different platforms that we'll go do."

Do you see any promise of future titles like they've said committed with ActiBliz? No.

It's either contractual obligations (Deathloop, Ghostwire), support for existing titles (76 and ESO) or legacy titles (quake remaster)

Again, I'll highlight

and even in the future there might be...either contractual things or legacy on different platforms that we'll go do."

Nothing about new titles. When a new Wolfenstein gets announced, it's going to be exclusive. When a new DOOM gets announced, it's going to be exclusive. That's what's going to happen. If you still want to believe otherwise then yeah, continue to be naive

Here's another for good measure

"But if you're an Xbox customer," Spencer continued, "the thing I want you to know is this is about delivering great exclusive games for you that ship on platforms where Game Pass exists. And that's our goal, that's why we're doing this, that's the root of this partnership that we're building - and the creative capability we'll be able to bring to market for Xbox customers is going to be the best it's ever been for Xbox after we're done here."

Exclusive games on platforms with gamepass. That's the goal

 

[Genx3]

To be honest I'd rather MS cancel the Activision purchase and buy the whole WB instead.

The whole thing as in Movies studios, DC Comics, etc.

 

[yurinka]

Not sure what else to tell you then. It's blatantly obvious if you bother to actually read what they've said after the deal went through. Not the PR bullshit they were spouting beforehand.

Here's another from Phil, once again after the deal went through

I assume it's pretty clear:
"Obviously I can't sit here and say every Bethesda game is [an Xbox] exclusive, because we know that's not true," ---> Every Bethesda game won't be exclusive

"There's contractual obligations that we're going to see through." ---> Some game can't be exclusive due to existing deals

" We have games that exist on other platforms and we're going to go and support those games on the platforms they're on. There's communities of players - we love those communities and will continue to invest in them - and even in the future there might be...either contractual things or legacy on different platforms that we'll go do." ---> They'll continue support existing communities/games/IPs on the platforms they are, not only the current ones but also in the future. They may even sign more contrantual htings.

It matches perfectly what I said: none of this mention that their future Bethesda games will be exclusive. It says the opposite, that they will continue releasing games for the other platforms beyond existing deals, in fact mentions they may even sign future deals with these platforms. Specifically mentions existing games/communities so maybe new IPs aren't included here and hints that they have exclusives.

So what we can understand from these quoutes is that some games will be exclusives (without specifying if temporal or not) and others won't. He mentions that they will support the games/communities in the platforms they are and that they may even sign more deals there, so it's fair to understand that their exclusives will be mostly new IPs.

Do you see any promise of future titles like they've said committed with ActiBliz? No.

It's either contractual obligations (Deathloop, Ghostwire), support for existing titles (76 and ESO) or legacy titles (quake remaster)

See above. He says they'll continue supporting games/communities in the platforms they are, and mentions future deals.

Again, I'll highlight



Nothing about new titles. When a new Wolfenstein gets announced, it's going to be exclusive. When a new DOOM gets announced, it's going to be exclusive. That's what's going to happen. If you still want to believe otherwise then yeah, continue to be naive

"We have games that exist on other platforms and we're going to go and support those games on the platforms they're on. There's communities of players - we love those communities and will continue to invest in them"

"even in the future there might be...either contractual things or legacy on different platforms that we'll go do"

They'll continue support games and invest in communities on other platforms, and even in the future they'll have more contractual stuff and legacy IPs.

Next Wolfenstein being exclusive is something out of your mind, nothing in this quotes hints at it since he doesn't say anything about exclusives or that existing IPs will go exclusive. He says the opposite, that will continue supporting existing games/communities on platforms where they exist and that there will be even future deals there.

Here's another for good measure

Exclusive games on platforms with gamepass. That's the goal

He says there:
I want Xbox customer know there will be great exclusive games where GP exists, this is why we do this.

He doesn't say that all their games will be exclusive or that IPs existing on other platforms will become exclusive. He explained above that ""Obviously I can't sit here and say every Bethesda game is [an Xbox] exclusive", but here he adds they'll also have exclusives.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I assume it's pretty clear:
"Obviously I can't sit here and say every Bethesda game is [an Xbox] exclusive, because we know that's not true," ---> Every Bethesda game won't be exclusive

"There's contractual obligations that we're going to see through." ---> Some game can't be exclusive due to existing deals

" We have games that exist on other platforms and we're going to go and support those games on the platforms they're on. There's communities of players - we love those communities and will continue to invest in them - and even in the future there might be...either contractual things or legacy on different platforms that we'll go do." ---> They'll continue support existing communities/games/IPs on the platforms they are, not only the current ones but also in the future. They may even sign more contrantual htings.

It matches perfectly what I said: none of this mention that their future Bethesda games will be exclusive. It says the opposite, that they will continue releasing games for the other platforms beyond existing deals, in fact mentions they may even sign future deals with these platforms. Specifically mentions existing games/communities so maybe new IPs aren't included here and hints that they have exclusives.

So what we can understand from these quoutes is that some games will be exclusives (without specifying if temporal or not) and others won't. He mentions that they will support the games/communities in the platforms they are and that they may even sign more deals there, so it's fair to understand that their exclusives will be mostly new IPs.


See above. He says they'll continue supporting games/communities in the platforms they are, and mentions future deals.


"We have games that exist on other platforms and we're going to go and support those games on the platforms they're on. There's communities of players - we love those communities and will continue to invest in them"

"even in the future there might be...either contractual things or legacy on different platforms that we'll go do"

They'll continue support games and invest in communities on other platforms, and even in the future they'll have more contractual stuff and legacy IPs.

Next Wolfenstein being exclusive is something out of your mind, nothing in this quotes hints at it since he doesn't say anything about exclusives or that existing IPs will go exclusive. He says the opposite, that will continue supporting existing games/communities on platforms where they exist and that there will be even future deals there.

He says there:
I want Xbox customer know there will be great exclusive games where GP exists, this is why we do this.

He doesn't say that all their games will be exclusive or that IPs existing on other platforms will become exclusive. He explained above that ""Obviously I can't sit here and say every Bethesda game is [an Xbox] exclusive", but here he adds they'll also have exclusives.

Your delusion is something else

 

[Neofire]

I assume it's pretty clear:
"Obviously I can't sit here and say every Bethesda game is [an Xbox] exclusive, because we know that's not true," ---> Every Bethesda game won't be exclusive

"There's contractual obligations that we're going to see through." ---> Some game can't be exclusive due to existing deals

" We have games that exist on other platforms and we're going to go and support those games on the platforms they're on. There's communities of players - we love those communities and will continue to invest in them - and even in the future there might be...either contractual things or legacy on different platforms that we'll go do." ---> They'll continue support existing communities/games/IPs on the platforms they are, not only the current ones but also in the future. They may even sign more contrantual htings.

It matches perfectly what I said: none of this mention that their future Bethesda games will be exclusive. It says the opposite, that they will continue releasing games for the other platforms beyond existing deals, in fact mentions they may even sign future deals with these platforms. Specifically mentions existing games/communities so maybe new IPs aren't included here and hints that they have exclusives.

So what we can understand from these quoutes is that some games will be exclusives (without specifying if temporal or not) and others won't. He mentions that they will support the games/communities in the platforms they are and that they may even sign more deals there, so it's fair to understand that their exclusives will be mostly new IPs.


See above. He says they'll continue supporting games/communities in the platforms they are, and mentions future deals.


"We have games that exist on other platforms and we're going to go and support those games on the platforms they're on. There's communities of players - we love those communities and will continue to invest in them"

"even in the future there might be...either contractual things or legacy on different platforms that we'll go do"

They'll continue support games and invest in communities on other platforms, and even in the future they'll have more contractual stuff and legacy IPs.

Next Wolfenstein being exclusive is something out of your mind, nothing in this quotes hints at it since he doesn't say anything about exclusives or that existing IPs will go exclusive. He says the opposite, that will continue supporting existing games/communities on platforms where they exist and that there will be even future deals there.

He says there:
I want Xbox customer know there will be great exclusive games where GP exists, this is why we do this.

He doesn't say that all their games will be exclusive or that IPs existing on other platforms will become exclusive. He explained above that ""Obviously I can't sit here and say every Bethesda game is [an Xbox] exclusive", but here he adds they'll also have exclusives.

You can not say this for certain when their hasn't been any current Bethesda projects that's yet to be released on platforms. They could be multiplatform and they very well could be exclusive moving forward.

I doubt MS paid all that money for them for the IP's and to not use them to gain an advantage or the competition. Anyone believing otherwise does not know anything about Microsoft what their history.

 

[Ordnasella_Edadnirt]

From all the interessed parties i would rather see MS or Sony snatching WB Games than Tencent or EA , even without getting the IP's Netherrealm and Rocksteady are pretty valuable at my point of view Netherrealm it's probably the best developer in the business when it comes to fighting games and Rocksteady it still the best when we talk about superhero games, this two are no brainers for any gaming company looking to bolster their portifolio.

 

[OldBoyGamer]

How many studios do WB own??
Rocksteady
BetterRealm

 

[RoadHazard]

This would only get the buyers the studios right, none of the IP? Maybe MK? Meh.

 

[yurinka]

Sony is a platform holder with a low level of vertical integration, basically designed to fill the gap left by independent publishers (third-person action-adventure games). As a result, Sony's publishing arm has no answer for Call of Duty, Diablo, FIFA, Fortnite, GTA, The Witcher ...

Sony doesn't need an answer for these games because they already are on their platform and they and most of the other top 3rd party AAA games (with a few very focused PC games like The Witcher and Diablo) make most of their money on Sony's platform. Sony gets 30% of the revenue they make on their platform.

If something, he'd need an answer to super successful games not available on their platform, maybe would be a good idea to push harder "Nintendo like" mascot games like Ratchet, Sackboy, Astro and so on since they have room to improve there, as they did pushing shooters with Bungie/Firewalk/Deviation to I assume counter a bit the shooters from MS or at least to cash more from FPS and GaaS. Sony is in a super successful market leader position, doesn't need to answer anything.

People like Rockstar, Ubisoft, Capcom, Square Enix or CD Project and other ones are also super successful with 3rd party action adventure games, they already have them covered with 3rd party. Sony focused there because it's the most successful genre for them, selling over 20M copies per game for their top blockbusters.

Microsoft is trying to gain control over the entire industry through massive horizontal and vertical integration.

if the deal goes through, Microsoft, a platform holder with deep pockets, will be a bigger publisher than EA and Take Two combined (or Nintendo and Sony combined) and leapfrog Sony's revenue in America.

This is the starting point for american and european regulatory agencies.

MS won't be bigger than EA and Tak2 combined or than Nintendo and Sony combined.

Even adding ABK, MS will continue being the 3rd of the gaming industry in revenue or the 3rd in console userbase or software sales and will be even smaller in mobile or PC, so they won't control anything and will continue having a small market share, so regulators shouldn't care.

The Neobrandeisians oppose modern antitrust laws that are based on the Chicago School's consumer welfare standard, and advocate that antitrust laws should promote not welfare but competitive markets.

Lina Khan, the FTC chair, is a neobrandeisian. She believes that concentration begets concentration, monopolies and oligopolies can inflict a host of harms, and that Big Tech companies corner different markets and then leverage the power gained from one market to dominate another.

Monopolies and oligopolies are bad for the economy.

Multiple monopolies and oligopolies run by the same five corporations are a nightmare.

Neobrandeisians, neokardashians or whatever you call them, if they look at market data they'll see that there are several top gaming companies and that these top ones barely a 10% of the market share.

And that MS won't be the top one. And that gaming has different submarkets like mobile, console PC or VR, each one with different market leaders and MS won't be leaded in any of them in revenue or userbase. There is nothing close to a monopoly in gaming and if someone has it, it isn't MS.

Unlike in other markets, even tech markets, in gaming the market is spread across many companies. There isn't here a company or two who control over 80% of the market. Here this over 80% of the market is covered by like the couple dozen of biggest companies together.

Since Microsoft started a full-scale acquisition war, SIE has acquired Insomniac, Bungie, Housemarque, Bluepoint, Firesprite, Haven, Nixxes and Valkyrie.

Insomniac was acquired before MS went crazy with the acquisitions. Bungie is a big and important studio but can't be compared to big ass publishers with many classic IPs like Activision Blizzard and Zenimax.

Housemarque, Bluepoint, Firesprite and Haven may be very talented but aren't top publishers, are medium/"small" sized AA/AAA devs (well, Firesprite now is so big) with no superseller games or IPs.

Nixxes and Valkyrie are support teams.

Yes, Sony has been acquiring and will continue acquiring. But until now it has been with a very different approach, scale and budget than MS. I think they aren't comparable. I think that if something, MS acquisitions should be compared to Embracer and Tencent, who have been acquiring these recent years a ton of teams and IPs, big and small.

If regulators don't stop Microsoft Corporation, Sony Group will end up helping SIE and things will get ugly for publishers, developers and gamers.

SIE is the market leader and these years has been performing way better than MS in many areas, breaking many gaming industry historical records for console makers and this acquisition won't change it, in the same way that when MS acquired Minecraft, Bethesda and the other ones didn't change anything.

There is enough pie for everybody, doesn't matter for Sony if MS gets a slightly larger slice, Sony's slice continues being bigger.

EVs are tanking

CD Projekt $2.78 billion
Square Enix $3.65 billion
Capcom $4.88 billion
Ubisoft $5.73 billion
Take Two $11.58 billion
Embracer Enterprise Value $6.37 billion

Covid lockdowns and restrictions did severely hurt some industries, but for many tech and home entertainment industries like gaming they caused a huge and unexpected spike in revenue.

A year later aprox these companies went back to normal, so many of them obviously now are reporting a fiscal year with YoY revenue decrease.

You can see this spike in the stock price of these companies (aprox. from April 20 to April 21). And to see the bigger picture when looking at their stock price I suggest you to instead of looking at the current day or week to click there on "max" (above 5 years) to see their complete graph to better understand their context.

Having said that, Microsoft is the most powerful corporation in the world and antitrust laws are outdated. It’s probably 50/50.

They may be a big corporation but in this market they aren't that powerful or important. Antitrust laws an regulators look at monopolies and so on, and here MS doesn't have anything close to a monopoly and aren't even close to become market leaders.

If they continue aggresively acquiring big publishers, maybe in the future they would stop them with other acquisition if they reached a market leader position with a huge market share highly dominating their competition. But as of now this is not the case at all, antitrust laws and regulators have no reason to block this acquisition.

How many studios do WB own??
Rocksteady
BetterRealm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._Interactive_Entertainment#Studios

 

[yurinka]

You can not say this for certain when their hasn't been any current Bethesda projects that's yet to be released on platforms. They could be multiplatform and they very well could be exclusive moving forward.

I only highlight what they said and what they did until now and try to match it. Regarding their releases since the acquisition:
-Ghostwire Tokyo (PS timed exclusive)
-Deathloop (PS timed exclusive)
-Quake Remastered (multiplatform, including PS)
-Doom Eternal DLC (multiplatform, including PS)
-ESO DLC (multiplatform, including PS)
-Fallout 76 DLC (multiplatform, including PS)
-Mighty Doom (mobile)

Nothing Xbox exclusive. Same goes with Mojang.

I doubt MS paid all that money for them for the IP's and to not use them to gain an advantage or the competition. Anyone believing otherwise does not know anything about Microsoft what their history.

They can use them to gain advantage to the competition in many ways other than turning all their future games exclusive:
-Zenimax's revenue and profit added to MS Gaming division
-Future and past Zenimax games secured for GP
-Future and past Zenimax games secured for Xbox
-They can (and I think will) block any future Zenimax exclusivity with Sony and Nintendo (there are rumors that they were negotiating with Sony for Starfield when MS acquired them)
-They can (and I think will) block the inclusion of future Zenimax games (and I think won't renew the existing ones in PS Now
-They can (and I think will) get marketing exclusivity for all future Zenimax games
-They can (and I think will) get console+games bundle exclusivity for all future Zenimax games
-They can (and I think will) block any potential future PS exclusive VR mode or game
-They can (and I think will) exploit their main IPs in other markets like movies, tv shows, comics, books and so on
-They can (and I think will) make Xbox timed console exclusive many future Zenimax games. To keep them exclusive to get PR push and gain console and GP sales and then a year or two later announce them for other consoles and still monetize them.

As MS said they can focus on multiplatform and timed console exclusivities (plus some exclusivity) and still benefit a lot from having acquired them.

You talk about not knowing anything about Microsoft history, but look at their Mojand and Minecraft IP acquisitions. Years after the acquisition they kept releasing Minecraft DLC as full multiplatform and released 2 console games more, both full multiplatform, none of them is an Xbox exclusive. Same as what Sony said they will do with Bungie.

 

[chromhound]

Sony

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Microsoft will acquire Netherrealm 100%. Everything else is up in the air.

And oof at those takes about Microsoft going multiplatform People are in for a rude awakening.

 

[JerryinSoCal]

Why would anyone want to buy these studios without an IP? I can see NRS value being high if Mortal Kombat comes with it but if you still have to pay fees to WB to make Mortal Kombat why bother buying the studio? let them keep making it and selling it on their own. None of their devs own any IP as far as I'm aware so this just seems like a silly move.

 

[Pallas]

Why did they backtrack last time when they wanted to sell their gaming assets? I wonder what changed.

Also, I don’t care who gets it other than Tencent and maybe Netease. I’d hate to see good IP’s and studios be owned by those two publishers. They would waste the potential(in my opinion)

 

[shamroxor]

The last time I heard, the rights to the No one lives forever games were tied up between Activision and WB so Microsoft buying would be worth it just to sort that particular mess out.

 

[SLB1904]

sony is in bed with marvel, dont think they will go for it

If people are not missing anything, that means they are not interested. I’m not interested in buying a Switch, so i don’t care about their games atm and i’m not missing anything. But at the same time, Nintendo has still more to offer for a lot of people then MS has released in the last 4/5 years.

I get that you like to shout that Miles was a DLC, and Forbidden West was nothing more than Zero Dawn, and Demon Souls was nothing more than a graphical update. People only say that when they want to reinforce their point because they know that on their own side the grass is not greener, which makes you try to feel better with such comments.

I don't care if people aren't interested in a playstation or something, but you don't have to tell other people that they're lying.

the downplay is real lol

 

[Baki]

I don’t expect Microsoft to make any big studio purchases for a while as they’ll be focused on closing the Activision purchase. Activision was the biggest 3rd party publisher in the world, I don’t think MS will have any interest in raising any more alarm bells by purchasing any other major studios in the next 2 years.

If the price and package is right, I can see Sony being interested.

In terms of 3rd parties, EA is likely to be the most interested. EA would like the studios and has a long history and experience producing licensed games. WB games could be their collection of studio for licensed games.

 

[Wastelander92]

Hope Sony get Netherealm and Mortal Kombat IP.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Why did they backtrack last time when they wanted to sell their gaming assets? I wonder what changed.

Also, I don’t care who gets it other than Tencent and maybe Netease. I’d hate to see good IP’s and studios be owned by those two publishers. They would waste the potential(in my opinion)

They just merged with Discovery and are cutting fat. Even like black lgbt Batwoman just got cancelled. A huge media corporation can just rake money like Disney/Marvel and license out properties instead of running studios themselves.