-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ampere Analyst expects Sony to react to Xbox’s Activision deal with a major acquisition of its own
- Thread starter adamsapple
- Start date
Salty Popsicle
Banned
Is there anything Sony has confirmed for 2024? People keep saying Wolverine is 2024, but if that was the case they would have stated it by now.
BootsLoader
Banned
Yes there are some games that may be released in 2024 like Rise of the Ronin, FF7 Rebirth, maybe Death Stranding 2. Wolverine is also possible.
Frwrd
Member
Let me guess, Nintendo is next as well. Right? Right?
Of course market share matters. What regulators value is the effect of an acquisition on competition in a market and whether or not to allow the prominent leader and near-monopoly in certain markets to monopolize gaming licenses that may be considered essential is going to be the subject of great scrutiny.
The only reason MS has been allowed to acquire ABK is that in the console market it is a long-distance third party or non-existent in certain markets. And yet it has had to sign the multiplatformity of COD and give up controlling the cloud game of the entire ABK catalog.
That is to say, it is difficult for me to believe that Sony could be allowed without any restrictions to buy, for example, Capcom (much less T2 or EA) for the free use of its licenses and Cloudgaming after what happened with ABK. Regulators would then be giving MS a license or passport to move forward with the acquisition of another publisher as well or arguments to defend itself against a possible block.
That is why I say that it will be important to know the reaction of the regulators after ABK and of the participants themselves. Do you think MS isn't going to hinder a big Sony acquisition the way Jim Ryan has done with ABK? Is Sony willing to show its internalities and strategies in a public court in the way that MS has had to endure?
That is to say, some believe that a large Sony acquisition is going to be a bed of roses and I don't see it so clearly.
Roronoa Zoro
Gold Member
You ignored the PC gaming market Microsoft controls though everything effectively needing to release on their os plus if ms is literally just allowed to buy everything as long as they remain third place then what's to stop them from just leaving things multiplat until they control every big currently third party ip and then yanking the rug out and taking the market once they control all the big names?
RickMasters
Member
You continue to have no clue. Good talk.
Lol….. awwww! you made vids and everything…. Somebody’s clearly butt hurt about something….. I just hit the ignore button and keep it moving. You clearly need a lil attention.
1- MS does not dominate the PC gaming market. In any case it would be Valve (Steam). In any case, the OS would affect the aspect of Cloudgaming and it has already been seen with ABK how it is resolved. Would Sony be willing to hand over the rights to its games to UBi?
2-Here we are not talking about MS and its possibilities of being able to buy new editors. We are talking about Sony.
Obviously MS is going to be under the lens of regulators after the acquisition of ABK, but that does not mean that Sony will have a free license to acquire whatever it wants without restrictions. Everything will depend on how they understand what will affect the market if the leader in consoles and 1-2 in revenue can increase control over licenses and make them exclusive.
If Sony buys Capcom, or Square, or Namco without any limitations or with slight..... it is clear that it would be an invitation to MS to be able to do the same and start another big acquisition.
3-The economic possibilities and purchasing capacity are not limitations to acquiring. The limitation is always the damage to the competitiveness of a market and to the consumer and is what the different regulators should investigate.
Basil King
Member
They will waste money on Square Enix. Spend billions to keep the 100 square Enix fans Xbox has from playing their games. Sounds like a waste of time.
Roronoa Zoro
Gold Member
It's more damaging to competition to let a larger company have more. Larger OVERALL company. Sony simply doesn't have the funds to buy every big third party IP. MS does.
Sony should have more leeway to buy those companies than MS ever would because it's where most of their console sales already are, so it's literally changing less than if MS bought them. Unless they're willing to say the current market is not competitive, they should be ok with the place where 2/3 of the console sales of some IP to keep selling it there. Not to mention history should be taken into account. MS didn't publish the original CODs, ESs, Fallouts, etc.
The only big IP Sony has really acquired is Destiny (they don't control Spidey in gaming) and they don't even control where that's published. So historical precedent shows one being far less restrictive with previously third party IP they buy and where they release.
While that's the current situation, imagine a huge number of those fans going to Xbox or at least leaving PS if they leave them for MS to buy. Sony I'm sure would be happy to leave IP available where they are today because they're happy with the current market shares. They need to take preventative measures to make sure that doesn't happen and FF and KH leaving their system would certainly hurt them.
Last edited:
No, it is not. The damage to competitiveness is not caused simply by the money that those who want to buy have. What makes it more so is the control that you monopolize over a market and that this control prevents the ability of the rest of the participants to compete or the arrival of new participants.
Allowing the general market leader and near-monopoly in certain to hoard essential game licenses freely just because or because of "he's not that rich" is nonsense. Regulators are going to scrutinize and investigate any large acquisition by Sony and anything that is allowing that acquisition without restrictions will be a passport to MS being able to initiate another large purchase.
Just imagine the FTC defending in court that MS with ABk creates a monopoly in the console market while Sony buying Capcom, EA or T2 does not entail any harm
What? LOL no. It's quite the opposite. Precisely the fact that these games come out only on PS because it is a prominent market leader is what would make the regulators come in and investigate anything. It's not just Xbox and its users, it's the exclusion of possible new participants and existing ones with interests. It is the damage to the competitiveness of the market in general.
And I repeat, having more money is not a reason why a regulator is going to block an acquisition. As I have said, logically after ABK MS it will be the subject of greater scrutiny because its position in the market and its power to influence it has changed. But he doesn't do it because he is richer than Sony.
This is not a question of how many licenses you have acquired, it is about the power and influence that a company has in a specific market. Sony/PlayStation is the market leader and for that fact alone regulators are going to put a magnifying glass and assess the effects of any Sony acquisition initiative. After ABK, the situation of the regulators has generated some bases for action that will also be applied to Sony. A decision in which, for example, the FTC allowed Sony an acquisition without scrutiny would go against its own arguments when it came to betting on blocking the acquisition of ABK and that would penalize vs a judge in a Court. Imagine in the EU where Sony has almost a monopoly....
Therefore, anyone who believes that a major Sony acquisition would be a bed of roses after the ABK process should think twice before.
Roronoa Zoro
Gold Member
Wrong on almost every count. License control IS market control. If Microsoft can yank away literally most of the most high selling games on PS tomorrow, they have more control regardless of if theyve exercised that right yet. No regulator should be foolish enough to believe that just because MS is third place now that them controlling all the big IP would not give them the ability to immediately nuke all competition from existenceNo, it is not. The damage to competitiveness is not caused simply by the money that those who want to buy have. What makes it more so is the control that you monopolize over a market and that this control prevents the ability of the rest of the participants to compete or the arrival of new participants.
Allowing the general market leader and near-monopoly in certain to hoard essential game licenses freely just because or because of "he's not that rich" is nonsense. Regulators are going to scrutinize and investigate any large acquisition by Sony and anything that is allowing that acquisition without restrictions will be a passport to MS being able to initiate another large purchase.
Just imagine the FTC defending in court that MS with ABk creates a monopoly in the console market while Sony buying Capcom, EA or T2 does not entail any harm
What? LOL no. It's quite the opposite. Precisely the fact that these games come out only on PS because it is a prominent market leader is what would make the regulators come in and investigate anything. It's not just Xbox and its users, it's the exclusion of possible new participants and existing ones with interests. It is the damage to the competitiveness of the market in general.
And I repeat, having more money is not a reason why a regulator is going to block an acquisition. As I have said, logically after ABK MS it will be the subject of greater scrutiny because its position in the market and its power to influence it has changed. But he doesn't do it because he is richer than Sony.
This is not a question of how many licenses you have acquired, it is about the power and influence that a company has in a specific market. Sony/PlayStation is the market leader and for that fact alone regulators are going to put a magnifying glass and assess the effects of any Sony acquisition initiative. After ABK, the situation of the regulators has generated some bases for action that will also be applied to Sony. A decision in which, for example, the FTC allowed Sony an acquisition without scrutiny would go against its own arguments when it came to betting on blocking the acquisition of ABK and that would penalize vs a judge in a Court. Imagine in the EU where Sony has almost a monopoly....
Therefore, anyone who believes that a major Sony acquisition would be a bed of roses after the ABK process should think twice before.
Mibu no ookami
Member
They didn't buy Activision for quality.
The last Call of Duty game that scored above an 80 was Black Ops 4 which scored an 83 in 2018...
The last CoD game to score above a 90?
Modern Warfare 2 in 2009... which was 94.
Buying a franchise that is in steep decline for 70 billion dollars is probably not the smartest move. Diablo 4 scored well with critics but not users and another won't release for a long time.
Overwatch has a 91 but Overwatch 2 has a 79...
World of Warcraft's latest release has an 82 metacritic and a 3.3 user rating.
I'll be SHOCKED if this doesn't go down as one of the worst purchases in the history of M&A and that will be determined if within 10 years, Microsoft exit the console business and/or sells ABK for less than they bought them for.
Laieon
Member
Metacritic is an abysmal way to actually gauge actual player opinions. Dragonflight has been very well received by those actually playing it. It's the best received expansion in 7-8 years. The user receives on Metacritic are low because gay representation is scary to certain stupid people.
/r/WoW and even MMOChamp (probably the biggest community sources) are FAR more positive than they were during Shadowlands and Battle for Azeroth.
Last edited:
No, and it is clear that you have not followed the entire regulatory process of the ABK acquisition very carefully. Accumulating many licenses is not the same as market control. The negatives effects that these licenses are under the hands of one of the participants has on the competitiveness of the market is what matters and is valued. Nothing else.
That is precisely why all regulators (with the exception of the FTC) understood that only COD could create a problem in the console market but not the rest Of ABK Ips, since Xbox is third in the long run. If MS had been first or very close second, an SLC consoles would have also been argued by regulators.
Having said that, you divert attention again. We are talking about Sony and not MS. After ABK MS, regulators will see it differently as its situation and position in the market is different. But that doesn't mean Sony will be free to buy whatever it wants and regulators will turn a blind eye. Quite the opposite.
Roronoa Zoro
Gold Member
But they gave Ms that so naturally Sony should be under LESS scrutiny. If they had denied it and then denied Sony that's one thing. To have a double standard and limit the company with less studios and less control over big IP as opposed to the one that now profits and benefits from the well being of the biggest ip on their direct competitor and can take that away after a certain point while gaining benefit from any game releasing on PC (unless Ms plans to support macOS versions of all the games). You keep saying we're talking about Sony and then immediately bring up a ruling for Ms so we're talking about both
One company has 24 studios, no PC operating system, a market cap about 1/8th the size of their competitor, and has a history of leaving any popular IP they buy multiplat and out of their control as far as release goes. The other controls the PC market, controls the biggest ip in gaming that they had no hand in making (making the overall size of their companies relevant since they're able to use that capital to dwarf any control Sony has in gaming in the console space), already has control of enough huge IP to make their competitor irrelevant whenever current contracts expire, is 8x larger in market cap, and has expressed intent and interest in buying more before as well as starting the big third party ip market buying spree
When Ms was at their lowest they went one route. When Sony was at their lowest they made their own. Now you may say that's because they couldn't afford to buy those third parties, and I'd say that's simply another argument against denying them anything when the alternative is Ms
Certainly if Sony who is a dwarf in comparison to Ms is denied a purchase of a third party publisher then certainly Ms should be denied any similar proposed purchase in the future. You can't simply penalize Sony for not messing up at the start of the 8th gen and ceding market share. They can show the 7th gen and how easily things can flip to show that they really don't own the market at all, certainly now that Ms controls the biggest games.
If you disagree then we simply have different values or think I'm talking legality rather than logic. I will ignore how as I'm fairly certain there's some sort of inherent bias that's making you wanna set the stage for Ms to buy more while denying the smaller Sony from doing anything to respond simply because MS has chosen to strategically not flex their muscle yet (cleverly so)
Last edited:
OuterLimits
Member
The only acquisition that would somewhat rival Activision would be Take Two Interactive. Although Take Two market cap has increased significantly in the last 12 months so not sure Sony could easily afford it.
I wonder if regulators would insist Sony do a similar 10 year kind of deal with GTA like Microsoft did with Call of Duty. Since Sony is the market leader by far(because some regulators bizarrely don't count Nintendo)
Of course a 10 year deal for GTA series would probably result in one game since GTA V was a decade ago now.
I wonder if regulators would insist Sony do a similar 10 year kind of deal with GTA like Microsoft did with Call of Duty. Since Sony is the market leader by far(because some regulators bizarrely don't count Nintendo)
Of course a 10 year deal for GTA series would probably result in one game since GTA V was a decade ago now.
simdog461
Member
No they definitely were, they just weren't prepared to spend as much as Sony.
Microsoft Considered Buying Bungie For Destiny 2 But There Was One ‘Risk’
As part of the treasure trove of documents being released in the Microsoft-FTC case, some have been revealed talking about Microsoft’s acquisition plans regarding non-Activision studios, namely SEGA, Bungie, Zynga and IO Interactive.
www.forbes.com
simdog461
Member
EA as well. People forget how popular
Anyway, Sony could definitely get the money together for T2, it would just be a question of how much risk Sony is willing to take.
StealthGoblin
Banned
If this happens I suspect Sony will go for a company that already has a foothold in Mobile and PC.
Mibu no ookami
Member
It would be hard to argue that there was a gaming SLC after they didn't deny Microsoft ABK on gaming alone, the only dispute was over cloud gaming.
Pretty hard to argue that GTA has the same reach for cloud gaming as CoD.
I think Sony wouldn't have much problem with regulators getting on board with acquiring T2.
As I've mentioned to others, there are a lot of ways for Sony to go about doing this. People for some reason think the only way to buy a company is straight cash. There is a multitude of ways to go about it.
Sony could ultimately get as little as 51% of T2 and still look at buying other studios like CDPR and FromSoftware if they felt it warranted.
In 2004, Sony led a consortium to buy MGM, and ended up with 20% of the company, but full distribution rights to the movies handled by Sony Pictures and Sony Pictures Home Entertainment. Equity deals are just as common for large-scale M&A.
Case in point when T2 purchased Zynga. Zynga's stock price was 8.55 at close, but the shareholders only got 3.50 per stock. The rest was made up for in equity in T2. At the current stock price at the close of the deal (116) this essentially accounted for 4.7 dollars per stock. That's a total of 8.2 dollars per stock. So there wasn't even a premium involved, it's also worth noting that T2's stock is up tremendously since then, so that stock is worth significantly more now.
Sony could do 10 billion in cash and 13 billion in equity in Sony, which is 12 percent of the company.
pepodmc_
Member
capcom doesnt want to be bought. They told that some weeks ago. As a pc gamer, i want them to be multiplatform, beucase i dont want to wait years to play their games on pc (if ported)
square enix i dont care really.
Mibu no ookami
Member
To be fair, they stated that they didn't want to be bought by Microsoft. That's not the same thing as saying they don't want to be bought.
I wouldn't be surprised that most Japanese companies wouldn't want to be bought by an American company.
pepodmc_
Member
there are some strange cases of costumers like me that dont care about EAFC/Battefield/nfs/GTA. i cared about nfs until undercover, from there, i didnt liked any new nfs.
Never liked GTA, too generic for me.
I dont care about bethesda at all and COD, its fun but i can live without COD.
Sleepwalker
Member
Oh yeah, I mostly don't play any of these games. But we are the exception to the rule.
pepodmc_
Member
Tsujimoto said he would "gracefully decline" any offer made
the "decline any offer" part sounds more like they dont want to be bought by anyone.
Jen_yakzua
Member
Context: When asked if the company would alternatively consider a buyout from Microsoft, Tsujimoto said, "I would gracefully decline the offer because I believe it would be better if we were equal partners:
He never said any company just Microsoft
StealthGoblin
Banned
I think Microsoft would have a bit of trouble getting CDPR now. They are already WRPG heavy and the regulators would look at that quite closely now.
They'd make sense for Sony as they don't have a WRPG and Sony want in on PC. As long as they remained committed to GOG and it's principles I wouldn't be averse.
I still think Sony will invest in a Japanese studio that already invests in PC and Mobile.
Taur007
Member
Yes...but in response to Sony doing this on a much smaller more annoying scale (timed exclusives) for much longer, how can you be so delusional?
RickMasters
Member
Fair play. I’m sure they had their reasons for not wanting to spend 3bn on bungie. Not wanting to us not the same as can’t, especially when we are talking about a company that just spent a smidge under 80 billion for two publishers and intends to buy more. Shame because I would have loved to see bungie back under Xbox wings.No they definitely were, they just weren't prepared to spend as much as Sony.
Microsoft Considered Buying Bungie For Destiny 2 But There Was One ‘Risk’
As part of the treasure trove of documents being released in the Microsoft-FTC case, some have been revealed talking about Microsoft’s acquisition plans regarding non-Activision studios, namely SEGA, Bungie, Zynga and IO Interactive.
To be honest bungie ain’t the same company that made halo anymore. So I can see why they weren’t that eager to outbid Sony for them.
RickMasters
Member
CDPR are not a huge company with a COD like franchise. And they typically have done all their marketing deals with Xbox on the console side. Witcher 2 was exclusive to Xbox 360. Cyberpunk even had a special edition Xbox. They are a natural purchase for MS when that time comes.
That’s assuming they are not already in talks….. they were on MS shopping list after all….. CDPR are a studio they want.
RickMasters
Member
To be fair he was answering specifically to MS. i think this would be their answer if they were asked about any company buying capcom.
StealthGoblin
Banned
Want is one thing - get is another. I think they'll have a lot more difficulties getting things over the line now. The more franchises they take exclusive the easier it will be to prove foreclosure.
RickMasters
Member
I think it depends on the company and IP. COD really is the exception to the rule that made the case for buying them a long process.
I don’t think they will have a problem. Buying smaller devs … like CDPR. They are not activision. I could agree if we are talking the likes of EA, UBI…which they are not allowed to make any moves on for Atleast 10 years…. But the fact that they could after that time is up pretty much says that they can not only buy smaller gaming entities like CDPR, right now but that larger ones like EA are not entirely off the cards either, at some point down the road…
If MS doesn’t buy them it’s an Amazon or tencent that does. A company with a lot of money on hand…. Embracer is out of the race. This is the part where it’s really just between the big spenders in the game…. Kind of reminds me of the music and film biz before they went through their phases of consolidation. Which sony was all to happy to play it’s part in. They are gonna fo whatever they have to do to make sure they also own some large 3p IP. Maybe they really should just start with square and see what Elise is up for sale after that.
Buying one publisher is not enough for any of these companies so there will be more. Even if Sony somehow managed to sell a part of themselves JUST to buy T2, they will not only be locked into RDR, and GTA remaining multi platform but they will also have to deal with inevitable further buying up of publishers….. how much more of themselves would they have to sell to stay in that fight? We are at the beginning of these aquisition wars. How does all this play out for them? They sell the TV and electronics divisions next? Till the point where they are just a games company? How much money do they have to be in that kind of fight?….. and how much of Sony will Sony have to give up to stay in the fight for these aquisition wars? We already have people talking about how they should sell off the finance division? And then what, when Another publisher is bought in response? What else do they sell off to buy something in response? or maybe Sony are better off doing a Nintendo and jus focusing on what has made them successful with the PlayStation this far…their 1st party output.
I’m sure Sony will buy some devs but I think people need are gonna be disappointed if they think Sony is gonna be buying anything the size of EA, let alone T2.
Roronoa Zoro
Gold Member
I get that there's monsterous IP like GTA and red dead but to think that they could either get those locked down or lock down all the Capcom, square, and Sega ip for less or around that same sum I think I know which I would pick. Take 2 is so huge and their valuable IP are so huge they'd probably be forced into a non exclusivity deal anyway.
FalsettoVibe
Member
EA would be massive big but cost upwards of 50B. Not impossible but T2 seems more attainable.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
- Helldivers 2
- Concord
- Rise of the Ronin
- Lost Souls Aside
- Convallaria
Full third-party PS exclusives such as Final Fantasy VII Rebirth and Granblue Fantasy Relink are also launching in 2024.
StealthGoblin
Banned
Sony don't need a publisher of that size.
It's looking to be a decent year. It should also be the year of some big announcements.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
I'm quite confident that we will see a big Showcase (like the Future of Gaming Showcases in 2020) where we might see upcoming big games running on a PS5 Pro.
Skelterz
Member
Honestly if they remade chrono trigger and FF6 faithfully and fired all the idiots that think turnbased games are redundant they’d be fine, there own downfall is forgetting who they are and allowing other studios like Atlus completely dominate the turn based market with games like Persona and SMT.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
SE does make turn-based games though. People aren’t buying them like they used to.
Octopath Travelers is a fantastic turn-based series akin to old Final Fantasy series.
simdog461
Member
That was my point though, just because they could outbid, doesn't necessarily mean they will.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked