Microsoft to buy Activision-Blizzard

[tkitch]

48 minutes ago, Spotty said:

Wow! Microsoft is buying Activision-Blizzard for $68.7 Billion.

Seriously Microsoft, you couldn't have at least shelled out an extra 300M for the memes?

NPR this morning mentioned it.
"...Spending nearly 69 Billion to buy...."

Me driving:  Nice.

[Fnige]

38 minutes ago, XGoodGuyFitz said:

other than forza games

Forza Horizon 5 is on steam

 

Horizon 4 too

[Vishera]

First Bethesda,now Activision-Blizzard....

It's very harmful to competition when you have so many things centralized in one place.

There should be a limit to how big they can get and how many companies they can acquire.

 

And another anti-competitive thing will get out of this - Call of Duty and other Activision-Blizzard titles will probably be XBOX\PC Exclusive.

 

[Chris Pratt]

The studio has been floundering for a while. From scandals, bad management, and delay after delay on releases, it needed some sort of shake up. I'm personally hopeful that Microsoft will right the ship.

 

As far as exclusivity goes, I think everyone is freaking out over nothing. Microsoft's current track record with these buys has been to leave games where they are. They've never actually pulled any existing games from any platform, and in some cases, have actually expanded the number of platforms games are on.

 

There might be new IP that Microsoft may make exclusive to Xbox/PC, but I doubt anything is going to change with any existing IP, including unreleased things like Diablo IV.

[Commodus]

1 hour ago, linkboy said:

 

Microsoft has been releasing their games on Xbox and PC, it's the PlayStation that I was referring to. For example, after the Bethesda purchase, all upcoming PS5 games from them were cancelled.

 

Call of Duty will now be Xbox and PC only, that's a massive blow for Sony.

We don't actually know that's the case. Microsoft and Activision Blizzard would lose a ton of revenue (not to mention industry power) if they just dropped Call of Duty for PlayStation. I could see timed exclusives, or maybe Xbox-only DLC, but not a full console exclusive for a long time.

 

This may be Microsoft's gaming equivalent to Office... that is, a title that needs to be cross-platform even though the company desperately wants to create (or cement) a monopoly.

[linkboy]

12 minutes ago, Commodus said:

We don't actually know that's the case. Microsoft and Activision Blizzard would lose a ton of revenue (not to mention industry power) if they just dropped Call of Duty for PlayStation. I could see timed exclusives, or maybe Xbox-only DLC, but not a full console exclusive for a long time.

 

This may be Microsoft's gaming equivalent to Office... that is, a title that needs to be cross-platform even though the company desperately wants to create (or cement) a monopoly.

 

Cool, let me know when Starfield (which was originally announced for Xbox, PS5 and PC) and the next Elder's Scroll game will be on PS5 (hint, they won't).

 

You don't drop $70 billion in cash and continue to give your games to your competition, it just doesn't work that way. Microsoft's goal is to get you to either buy a Xbox or subscribe to Gamepass, that's it. It's why they're trying to get Gamepass on everything under the sun. They want Gamepass to be the default gaming service and purchase like this (and the Bethesda one) give them the ammunition to do so.

 

Microsoft wants to bury Sony, they want them out of their way since Sony is one of their biggest obstacles to achieving their end goal of making their platforms (Xbox, Windows and Gamepass) the only place to play games.

[Helpful Tech Witch]

57 minutes ago, XGoodGuyFitz said:

other than forza games

Or any other Xbox game, bassically all of them are on pc

[Stahlmann]

59 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

then epic games buys roblox.

Just to be bought up by Valve in the end, bringing us all back to Steam as the one place to launch your games from.

It's all part of the plan.

[connorkincaid]

5 minutes ago, Stahlmann said:

Just to be bought up by Valve in the end, bringing us all back to Steam as the one place to launch your games from.

It's all part of the plan.

I hope to GOD

[Dreckssackblase]

40 minutes ago, huilun02 said:

All they needed was to let Xboxes dual boot Windows, and then Playstation would be up against a product that can do a lot more than just games.

I've never had an xbox but I would instantly pick up a Series S as an emulation machine and Steam Link machine for my TV if that were the case.

[poochyena]

Not enough of you are talking about how much was paid for it. 68.7 billion. That is more than Microsoft's net income for the entire year of 2021. Its an insane amount of money. They really went all in on this purchase.

Personally though... kinda don't care. The last activision game I think I played was for the Wii.

[Chris Pratt]

55 minutes ago, Commodus said:

We don't actually know that's the case. Microsoft and Activision Blizzard would lose a ton of revenue (not to mention industry power) if they just dropped Call of Duty for PlayStation. I could see timed exclusives, or maybe Xbox-only DLC, but not a full console exclusive for a long time.

 

This may be Microsoft's gaming equivalent to Office... that is, a title that needs to be cross-platform even though the company desperately wants to create (or cement) a monopoly.

Totally agree. Microsoft and Sony are approaching games from entirely different perspectives. Sony needs game sales to drive console sales and vice versa. Microsoft is pushing for gaming as a service. Xbox is just a gateway, but they want to be everywhere. If Sony would allow it, I'm sure Microsoft would push Game Pass for Playstation. They get the revenue from from their studios and subscriptions no matter where you ultimately play.

[Radium_Angel]

Can you concentrate that much evil in one place?

[yian88]

Garbage buys more garbage to pile it up, whew.

[Commodus]

59 minutes ago, linkboy said:

 

Cool, let me know when Starfield (which was originally announced for Xbox, PS5 and PC) and the next Elder's Scroll game will be on PS5 (hint, they won't).

 

You don't drop $70 billion in cash and continue to give your games to your competition, it just doesn't work that way. Microsoft's goal is to get you to either buy a Xbox or subscribe to Gamepass, that's it. It's why they're trying to get Gamepass on everything under the sun. They want Gamepass to be the default gaming service and purchase like this (and the Bethesda one) give them the ammunition to do so.

 

Microsoft wants to bury Sony, they want them out of their way since Sony is one of their biggest obstacles to achieving their end goal of making their platforms (Xbox, Windows and Gamepass) the only place to play games.

Bethesda's games are different. It's not as big as Activision Blizzard, and the titles you mentioned are either original (thus no large existing fan base) or a sequel to a game that's over a decade old. You'd have an argument if Elder Scrolls was a new-game-every-year franchise that served as the tentpole for an entire developer, but it's clearly not.

 

And while I'm sure Microsoft would like the idea of buying Sony... it won't, and probably can't. You think the Activision Blizzard deal might lead to heavy regulatory scrutiny? Try buying the overall leader in game consoles solely to shut down competition. That's assuming it would have the cash. $68.7 billion would be nothing compared to how much Sony is worth.

[Doobeedoo]

Oho well this is an interesting one. I'm sure it's at least partially due to recent events that have been happening, but maybe also was a plan already. Still, can't imagine how Blizzard games will continue from here. As someone who plays their main series, yeah general new WoW expansions, D4, new SC probably never, can only hope some SC non-RTS game then. Rest of the games are horrible and I can't even imagine what new IP they would create.

[linkboy]

13 minutes ago, Commodus said:

Bethesda's games are different. It's not as big as Activision Blizzard, and the titles you mentioned are either original (thus no large existing fan base) or a sequel to a game that's over a decade old. You'd have an argument if Elder Scrolls was a new-game-every-year franchise that served as the tentpole for an entire developer, but it's clearly not.

 

And while I'm sure Microsoft would like the idea of buying Sony... it won't, and probably can't. You think the Activision Blizzard deal might lead to heavy regulatory scrutiny? Try buying the overall leader in game consoles solely to shut down competition. That's assuming it would have the cash. $68.7 billion would be nothing compared to how much Sony is worth.

 

I didn't say buy Sony, I said bury them. 

 

Microsoft doesn't want you to play games on any platform that isn't theirs. It's why they're pushing Gamepass so hard. They want it to be the default game streaming platform (Xbox, Windows or Gamepass). They want it on mobile devices, smartTVs, set top boxes, computers, etc.

 

That's what this Activision purchase was for, to add more value to Gamepass (same with the Bethesda purchase). Sony is a roadblock in the path to that goal. Taking away one of Sony's biggest assets (CoD) is a benefit to Microsoft to get them to their ultimate goal.

 

Existing games will continue to be supported, so CoD Warzone will continue to be on the Playstation, but I guarantee you that future CoD games won't. 

 

 

[Shreyas1]

Gamepass is already a really good deal, I don't get why they would add more to that unless they're planning on increasing the price soon. I especially don't get why they're going after Activision after the whole controversy, but maybe they realized it's a cheaper this way. If activision is found guilty, does MS have to pay the price?

 

Activision/Blizzard games haven't been good in a while, maybe a change of ownership will help. I mean a lot of MS games were good this year, like Halo and Forza.

[pas008]

thinking this is a metaverse IP buy

[linkboy]

1 minute ago, Shreyas1 said:

Gamepass is already a really good deal, I don't get why they would add more to that unless they're planning on increasing the price soon. I especially don't get why they're going after Activision after the whole controversy, but maybe they realized it's a cheaper this way. If activision is found guilty, does MS have to pay the price?

 

Activision/Blizzard games haven't been good in a while, maybe a change of ownership will help. I mean a lot of MS games were good this year, like Halo and Forza.

 

Sony's working on their own subscription similar to Gamepass, and Microsoft just fired a massive cannon shot across their bow by buying the company behind Call of Duty.

 

This also give Microsoft a leg up on other companies trying to get into the stream gaming market as Activision is no longer a target for an acquisition by someone like Amazon, Facebook, Google or Tencent.

[ToboRobot]

Former Xbox Exec Mike Ybarra Joins Blizzard as General Manager - Variety

 

Embrace, extend, and extinguish - Wikipedia


 

[GoodBytes]

For anyone who wonders, the transaction needs to be approved by regulators first.

It looks like the earliest Microsoft will actually own Activision, it will be in 2023.

[IkeaGnome]

Just now, GoodBytes said:

For anyone who wonders, the transaction needs to be approved by regulators first.

It looks like the earliest Microsoft will actually own Activision, it will be in 2023.

I hope for ActiBliz's sake it's allowed to pass. 

Blizzard has proven time and time again that it can't run it's self. Activision hasn't been able to turn it around. Hopefully Microsoft can "help" AB.

[GoodBytes]

10 minutes ago, ToboRobot said:

Former Xbox Exec Mike Ybarra Joins Blizzard as General Manager - Variety

 

Embrace, extend, and extinguish - Wikipedia
 

Except, you know, they were in talks long before.  You think you can just buy a company because one feel like it, and have it the next day?

These things are well over 6-8 months in the making. These are very complex deal. You are not buying a chocolate bar at the dollar store. You are buying a public company, and there is a huge complexity on the company evaluation process, bidding, shareholders evaluation, shareholders and investors approvals, CEO and board of directors/executives approval, and beside price, a full plan needs to be set, how the company will be managed at this point. Would it have it's own HR, or use the same HR as Microsoft, how about finance side of things, taxes, and so on. Studies, plans, and more approvals.

[ToboRobot]

6 minutes ago, GoodBytes said:

Except, you know, they were in talks long before.  You think you can just buy a company because one feel like it, and have it the next day?

These things are well over 6-8 months in the making. These are very complex deal. You are not buying a chocolate bar at the dollar store. You are buying a public company, and there is a huge complexity on the company evaluation process, bidding, shareholders evaluation, shareholders and investors approvals, CEO and board of directors/executives approval, and beside price, a full plan needs to be set, how the company will be managed at this point. Would it have it's own HR, or use the same HR as Microsoft, how about finance side of things, taxes, and so on. Studies, plans, and more approvals.

The news about Mike was from Oct 24, 2019.