Support NeoGAF

[AmuroChan]

This better not be jimbo’s idea of bombshell acquisitions

It's not. Jimbo runs SIE. He has nothing to do with Sony Music/Aniplex.

 

[kyoji]

We knew about this weeks ago, this isnt apart of what jim ryan was referencing yesterday.

 

[kyoji]

It's not. Jimbo runs SIE. He has nothing to do with Sony Music/Aniplex.

 

[lastmessiah]

I watched a documentary about some Japanese guy who was hopelessly addicted to Fate/Order or whatever it's called. Lived with his parents and spent tens of thousands of dollars on this game and did nothing else. Seemed like the good life. Apparently it is very big over there.

 

[JLB]

antitrust incoming

 

[ZywyPL]

I'm with you OP, the more diversity the better, previous generation felt like everything is the same - the same hardware, the same software, the only real difference was a dozen or so games not available on the other console. Boooriiing.

 

[Sosokrates]

This is big income money for Sony.

Mobile market can fund Sony 1st party games.

King alone makes around $2b revenue a year. That is 10 1st party games funding money.

No doubt, I just find it unexciting as a gamer.

 

[JerryinSoCal]

If for some crazy reason this acquisition falls through Jim will probably try to get a refund for Bungie

Being that this deal has been 6 months or more in the making I doubt it.

 

[NinjaBoiX]

I bet COD stays multiplat in order for this shit to pass

That’ll knock a huge chunk off the value, CoD is undoubtedly the golden egg in this deal.

 

[kingfey]

They don't care what Microsoft's current position is in the market. Their lens looks further out than you do. They care that they're one of the few forces capable of spending upwards of $100 billion and more absorbing companies.

You can play naive as much as you want, but if you can see Microsoft's warchest at play here, then so can they.

We seen that warchest from disney, and nothing happened.

These guys care about privacy, which is why they are focused on tech companies.

MS is on gaming. Gaming is big. They wont bother with MS, even if they spend $150b.

As long as there is tons of studios around the world, They wont care about it.

Only MS would be monopoly is them buying steam. Because they will own battle net, steam, and bethesda net, including their windows store.

 

[TheDreadLord]

Actually these government resources are doing exactly what they were created to do. Why doesn't that make sense?

Because there is no monopoly there. We have at least 4 big platforms and a number of smaller platforms available in the market. It is different than, let’s say, NVidia/Arm deal where you basically have the whole market locked to designs developed by Arm (the exception is Apple).

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

We seen that warchest from disney, and nothing happened.

These guys care about privacy, which is why they are focused on tech companies.

MS is on gaming. Gaming is big. They wont bother with MS, even if they spend $150b.

As long as there is tons of studios around the world, They wont care about it.

Only MS would be monopoly is them buying steam. Because they will own battle net, steam, and bethesda net, including their windows store.

The reshaping of the FTC to tackle big tech is new, and the chief of that does not like big tech, at all, which obviously includes Microsoft. They are going to have a fight on there hands here.

 

[Heimdall_Xtreme]

Sony just buying random shit?

I forgot to add the word cheap


Cheap sh....


I don't understand Sony.

Its closes high quality studios and a very uniquely talented studio and with amazing artistic games…. And then they buys studios that no one cares about.

 

[gow3isben]

Yeah Fate only brings in like a BILLION dollars. Terrible to have in your portfolio for sure.

Idgaf brah

Anyway others answered my question jimbo off the hook

 

[yurinka]

Who?

A Japanese mobile gaming studio that makes Sony Music earn $1B/year.

We knew about this weeks ago, this isnt apart of what jim ryan was referencing yesterday.

True.

King alone makes around $2b revenue a year. That is 10 1st party games funding money.

This game alone gave Sony $1B in a year. King has many big games and studios, must make more than $2B/year.

 

[dotnotbot]

Because there is no monopoly there.

It's not up to internet armchair experts to decide.
And as far as I understand this isn't just about monopoly.

 

[Lognor]

They don't care what Microsoft's current position is in the market. Their lens looks further out than you do. They care that they're one of the few forces capable of spending upwards of $100 billion and more absorbing companies.

You can play naive as much as you want, but if you can see Microsoft's warchest at play here, then so can they.

It sounds like you're talking shit. Can you source anything you're saying?

 

[Ozriel]

Nvidia had a substantial $1.5 billion blackout fee for ARM too. Guess what. It still isn't going through

Do you have an aversion to doing any reading? There's ample material out there on why this was so contentious, and so bitterly opposed by governments and competitors.

This industry hasn't had a $70 billion aquistion before either. There's a first time for everything.

Like i said in my other post. They're not going to argue Microsoft has a monopoly because they bought ActiBliz or anything like that. They're going to look at the risk letting a big tech comapny to absord so many companies and how that would affect consumer choice in the future.

They're not going to make a decision based on future projections and guesswork. And as at today, post acquisition Microsoft Gaming is still third in revenue behind Tencent and Sony.

Of course every acquisition affects consumer choice. Even exclusivity deals. Still nowhere near any concerns of monopoly...and it doesn't hurt that there's multiple ways to play Xbox content.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

It sounds like you're talking shit. Can you source anything you're saying?

You're free to join in and give your take or sit down with the rest

 

[CuNi]

Who will want to play the base game without dlc?

So in your world, once a DLC releases, base game is worthless.

Can you play the witcher 3, without the dlc?

Yes, are you in physical pain playing this game without the DLC installed?

Gamers want full experience.

So you're that guy that before even playing buys all 650+ DLCs, that cost upwards of 5k $ for Train Simulator 2022 because according to your reply's you are unable to play a game without having all DLC.
I now get why "PC master race" has such a bad rep when there is people like you out there posting shit tier takes around the internet.

Obviously games don't lose any worth when DLC releases and I assure you, you can play them without DLC just fine. It's also cheaper to rebuy DLC than base game + DLC.
I swear some of you make me question human intelligence.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Do you have an aversion to doing any reading? There's ample material out there on why this was so contentious, and so bitterly opposed by governments and competitors.

Another person who can't grasp context. Good job.

They're not going to make a decision based on future projections and guesswork. And as at today, post acquisition Microsoft Gaming is still third in revenue behind Tencent and Sony.

Of course every acquisition affects consumer choice. Even exclusivity deals. Still nowhere near any concerns of monopoly...and it doesn't hurt that there's multiple ways to play Xbox content.

Yes, they will. Their job is to look ahead into the future

 

[Mr Moose]

No doubt, I just find it unexciting as a gamer.

We're not mobile gamers (or I hope we aren't... *spits*) so it doesn't mean much for us.
As a weeb... I need to catch up on the Fate animes, I think I only watched half of the Fate/Stay Night stuff.

 

[Oddvintagechap]

There goes some of the money Sony was going to spend in the next 2/3 years

it will pay off itself yesterday.

 

[TheThreadsThatBindUs]

The deal happened after the Activision deal. That's how timelines work. Sure they were in talks beforehand, as was everyone else. The Activision deal pushed them over the finish line and got them to overpay.

Then you're being absurdly disingenuous. That the deal was closed after the Activision one is irrelevant. You're using that to try to suggest the Bungie deal was a response to the Activision one. It wasn't

 

[EDMIX]

Genshin Impact says hi!!

Also I think MS wouldn't hesitate to buy a Japanese publisher if they can, I mean without the doubt, but it seems not so easy specially japanese devs, not prices issues but has more to do with some japanese rules.

Agreed. Thats probably why Sony bought Bungie instead of focusing on a Japanese publisher. They already have their majority support anyway and MS would have a very, very hard time even getting such a deal in as thats rare in Japan.

Sony already do open world games as good as or better than Ubisoft, there's no need for them to even attempt to get them imo.
Square-Enix would be a good get, they are already close and I like Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest and some other Square IPs.
Capcom for Monster Hunter, force some Switch players to switch (heh).
Maybe some Konami IPs rather than the company.

I disagree.

Ubisoft has many, many key teams that would fit right in to what Sony already do and fill gaps to what they don't.

I agree Sony do open world games well, they don't do it Ubisoft, yearly breaking records with all franchises well..... no knock to Sony btw, but Ubisoft right now is the open world king. Open world MMO, open world FPS, open world 3rd person shooter, open world RPG, open world racer. They have Sony beat by default of just how many genres they do well in. It would if anything help PS and solidify them as the Single player kings, they complement each other well in this respect.

This publisher can fill the void of what was lost from Zenimax and Activision. Ubisoft has Rainbow Six and The Division on top of Ghost Recon, thus Sony can get their MP gaas fix, Ubisoft also has lots of RPGs too. I think its a solid buy and I can't just add in some bias i have cause I like Ghost Of Tsushima more then AC or something, that fucking game isn't also doing AC numbers bud lol So I'm not going to just force my personal view into such a topic, I need to factor what has factually sold under Ubisoft and what would make sense for Sony. I mean, even look at your point, Sony does those better? Well when Sony buys Ubisoft, would they not then do those better now that they'd be owned by Sony? =) How would that be bad? Take a record breaking IP and make it even better under Sony? Why would Sony not want that?

Keep an open mind on it. Sony is already getting most of the sales of Square's games and Capcom and its harder for MS to even buy such teams, which means Ubisoft should be their first stop before those other companies imho.

 

[Lognor]

You're free to join in and give your take or sit down with the rest

So you are just pulling this out of your ass? Got it.

Here's one I just made up. Sony is not going to be able to make any more acquisitions because of the visibility and scrutiny around consolidation in the industry. The FTC will delay any approval for Sony for years until AFTER the Microsoft deal is done. Bungie was their one opportunity. Now they can't make a move until at late 2023 or 2024. Feel free to rebut this, but you won't be able to. These are facts and no, I won't give you sources.

 

[Lognor]

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

So you are just pulling this out of your ass? Got it.

Here's one I just made up. Sony is not going to be able to make any more acquisitions because of the visibility and scrutiny around consolidation in the industry. The FTC will delay any approval for Sony for years until AFTER the Microsoft deal is done. Bungie was their one opportunity. Now they can't make a move until at late 2023 or 2024. Feel free to rebut this, but you won't be able to. These are facts and no, I won't give you sources.

Mate I know how much of a dumb shitposter you are here lol. Again feel free to join in or sit down.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

These guys care about privacy, which is why they are focused on tech companies.

Yes, and in case of Amazon and Apple they also care about the tech giants leveraging their own platforms to suppress the competition, similar to what Microsoft did in 90s but more inventive this time

Do you have an aversion to doing any reading? There's ample material out there on why this was so contentious, and so bitterly opposed by governments and competitors.

I remember people bringing up Lockheed Aerojet merger as argument too

 

[Pejo]

For a little context, this is more of an organization shuffling. They more or less already owned Fate GO. This just frees up DelightWorks from the project and lets them move on to other things (but their work is shoddy at best anyways).

 

[Ogbert]

Apologies for being that dildo on the internet, but I have the misfortune of being a regulatory competition lawyer for a large payments company. I won’t pretend to know anything about the video game industry, but I don’t see any reason it would be special.

The word monopoly tends to be used incorrectly. A monopoly, in and of itself, isn’t necessarily a sign of foul play. You could just be the best. It’s when you use that position to *deny access* to the market. Nothing in the MS deal gets close to suggesting that. Indeed, Sony’s response yesterday simply demonstrates market forces. Bullies can use their money.

As I said above, what I think is really interesting is whether the Activision story was exaggerated to influence the share price. Get the SEC involved. That would be amusing.

 

[Lognor]

Mate I know how much of a dumb shitposter you are here lol. Again feel free to join in or sit down.

But you're the one with all the dumb shit posts in this thread. I don't get it. Are you me? You seem like the top dumb shitposter on this forum. So yeah

 

[Majukun]

know little about the rules and regulations these institution are made to uphold, which is why i don't understand why this wouldn't pass without issues

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

But you're the one with all the dumb shit posts in this thread. I don't get it. Are you me? You seem like the top dumb shitposter on this forum. So yeah

Well continuing to shitpost is another option I guess, but go for it.

 

[Mr Moose]

Agreed. Thats probably why Sony bought Bungie instead of focusing on a Japanese publisher. They already have their majority support anyway and MS would have a very, very hard time even getting such a deal in as thats rare in Japan.


I disagree.

Ubisoft has many, many key teams that would fit right in to what Sony already do and fill gaps to what they don't.

I agree Sony do open world games well, they don't do it Ubisoft, yearly breaking records with all franchises well..... no knock to Sony btw, but Ubisoft right now is the open world king. Open world MMO, open world FPS, open world 3rd person shooter, open world RPG, open world racer. They have Sony beat by default of just how many genres they do well in. It would if anything help PS and solidify them as the Single player kings, they complement each other well in this respect.

This publisher can fill the void of what was lost from Zenimax and Activision. Ubisoft has Rainbow Six and The Division on top of Ghost Recon, thus Sony can get their MP gaas fix, Ubisoft also has lots of RPGs too. I think its a solid buy and I can't just add in some bias i have cause I like Ghost Of Tsushima more then AC or something, that fucking game isn't also doing AC numbers bud lol So I'm not going to just force my personal view into such a topic, I need to factor what has factually sold under Ubisoft and what would make sense for Sony. I mean, even look at your point, Sony does those better? Well when Sony buys Ubisoft, would they not then do those better now that they'd be owned by Sony? =) How would that be bad? Take a record breaking IP and make it even better under Sony? Why would Sony not want that?

Keep an open mind on it. Sony is already getting most of the sales of Square's games and Capcom and its harder for MS to even buy such teams, which means Ubisoft should be their first stop before those other companies imho.

Yeah the more I thought about it the more it made sense, though I would personally prefer S-E to Ubisoft, it would probably be better if they did acquire Ubisoft over Square.

 

[Lognor]

Well continuing to shitpost is another option I guess, but go for it.

Yeah you are clearly doing that. You want a cookie?

How do I count posts in a thread? Gotta imagine you're the top shit poster in this thread at least.

 

[kingfey]

Yes, and in case of Amazon and Apple they also care about the tech giants leveraging their own platforms to suppress the competition, similar to what Microsoft did in 90s but more inventive this time

MS isnt that big relevant in the gaming industry.
Their windows store is hot garbage mess. Their xbox console have been shat on by PlayStation and Nintendo.

Even with these publishers, they wont be that big. They will need 4-5 years to be big.

Only big advantage they have is xcloud. And that tech is in its infancy now.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Yeah you are clearly doing that. You want a cookie?

How do I count posts in a thread? Gotta imagine you're the top shit poster in this thread at least.

Mate i'm discussing the topic. You're shitposting. Big difference

 

[EDMIX]

Yeah the more I thought about it the more it made sense, though I would personally prefer S-E to Ubisoft, it would probably be better if they did acquire Ubisoft over Square.

true, don't get me wrong I still think they should buy square, simply later on since they are more safe.

Square has a lot of IP that make sense for Sony too, they can get an MMO, lock down JRPGs, WRPGs with Deus Ex and action games with Tomb Raider which I believe can do very well under Sony and the right direction. I think both purchases are very likely

 

[Lone Wolf]

this is gonna have microsoft jammed up for the next several months and possibly blocks them from going after EA or Take Two at this point. No way this goes through and a year from now they buy another huge publisher

I’d say they even have to be wary about big devs at this point

This is standard procedure, and will be cleared in the time stated. It’s not an issue.

 

[kingfey]

A Japanese mobile gaming studio that makes Sony Music earn $1B/year.


True.


This game alone gave Sony $1B in a year. King has many big games and studios, must make more than $2B/year.

Fate was big game. Sony was lucky to have that.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Then you're being absurdly disingenuous. That the deal was closed after the Activision one is irrelevant. You're using that to try to suggest the Bungie deal was a response to the Activision one. It wasn't

I highly suspect that the timeline was

• Microsoft and Sony were interested in Bungie
• Bungie asked 2b+ and independent publishing
• MS was not really willing
• Opportunity to grab ATVI arised
• MS pull out from the talks
• Sony has run into a situation
  • They can potentially lose another FPS in the future (like Doom Wolf, COD)
  • They don't have successful GaaS expertise (they have a lot of live service projects in pipeline)
  • They don't have succesfull running GaaS games that brings recurring revenue
  • Bungie had a lot cards to leverage here
    • Bungie wanted to expand into other media (movies) too

 

[SlimySnake]

I agree with others that Microsoft doesn't have much of a shot at acquiring any of the Japanese publishers. But people shouldn't sleep on Nintendo. I could see Capcom going to Sony and Sega going to Nintendo.

I don't think Sony needs to worry about Square Enix considering their relationship and Japanese protection. Also too many franchises that aren't capable of running on Nintendo hardware.

Bungie was a brilliant gaming and business move because they bring a ton of knowledge on areas that Sony has been historically weak in (FPS, GaaS, Online multiplayer, mtx). It's a move that'll bolster almost all of their studios immediately. Playstation values synergy between their first party devs.

The glaring issue for Sony is that their biggest console franchise (Gran Turismo) has sold less than a quarter of what Microsoft and Nintendo's biggest franchises (Minecraft, COD, Mario, Pokemon, etc) have. Sony needs a franchise like GTA to call their own. If I'm Jim then I'm convincing Sony execs to go all in on Take-Two. It's only slightly out of their budget.

Take2's zynga acquisition made them pretty much un-buyable for Sony and even for Microsoft who now have to spent maybe $40 billion to acquire a company that was $18 billion just last month. Zynga is a mess too and i dont think anyone wants to spend $12 billion on farmville.

Wouldnt be surprised if take2 did it just so they wouldnt be bought out.

 

[Fully engaged]

Unless Sony is interested in getting into the light novel business kadokawa is just nonsense pipe dreams from people who want to console war souls games exclusivity.

 

[Edgelord79]

Obviously it will be. Nothing will come of it. MS may have to divest of something minor, but much ado about nothing.

 

[Topher]

Because there is no monopoly there. We have at least 4 big platforms and a number of smaller platforms available in the market. It is different than, let’s say, NVidia/Arm deal where you basically have the whole market locked to designs developed by Arm (the exception is Apple).

There doesn't have to be a monopoly involved for government oversight to kick in. There is a dollar amount threshold that triggers the review.

 

[Lognor]

Mate i'm discussing the topic. You're shitposting. Big difference

And I asked you for a source of this shit you were spewing. You don't know what you're talking about. You're not in the M&A field. You haven't been able to source anything to back up your assertions. You're talking shit. Shit poster.

There doesn't have to be a monopoly involved for government oversight to kick in. There is a dollar amount threshold that triggers the review.

What dollar amount? Source?

 

[Iced Arcade]

I bet COD stays multiplat in order for this shit to pass

Yeah the great Congress debate over call of duty.


Lol jesus

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

And I asked you for a source of this shit you were spewing. You don't know what you're talking about. You're not in the M&A field. You haven't been able to source anything to back up your assertions. You're talking shit. Shit poster.

Do you need a source for everything everyone says to you? It's called a discussion. Probably not your strong suit granted given how stupid a lot of your posts are

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

MS isnt that big relevant in the gaming industry.
Their windows store is hot garbage mess. Their xbox console have been shat on by PlayStation and Nintendo.

Even with these publishers, they wont be that big. They will need 4-5 years to be big.

Only big advantage they have is xcloud. And that tech is in its infancy now.

Yeah, true. That's why I am saying there is nothing special in this deal.

I mean MS does own Windows but it does not use it to suppress competition. MS really doesn't want it and it is not worth it as Microsoft benefits more if it is more open as it leads to wider use. If they used Windows to suppress Chrome in favor of Edge, then they would be questioned. If they used Windows to suppress Steam and other stores in favor of Microsoft Store, then they would be questioned. In that regard, it is nothing.

Now compare it with Apple, who leveraged their App Store to collect the data from Spotify and then introduced Apple Music (don't remember exact details). Or Amazon Marketplace that sell their own goods cheaper on their own platform (or something like that).