Interfectum
Member
Literally anyone can post a tweet like this right now and be correct. Companies are dumping billions to avoid their money losing value of course big shit is coming.
Last edited:
-
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.
Mergers and Acquisitions |OT| Thread Merged
- Thread starter Tiago Rodrigues
- Start date
- |OT|
Sony absolutely is. It's their best chance this year. Investors will see the trend and potential targets will become more and more expensive.
Microsoft will be busy to make sure the Activision deal is approved and won't end up like the botched Nvidia 40 billions ARM acquisition. So a low profile with further acquisitions will be needed to ensure everything goes smoothly.
Last edited:
Sinfulgore
Member
Sony buying Valve would be pointless. Valve rarely makes games and has very little to offer Sony's PlayStation brand. Most console gamers probably don't even know who valve is, the last console game they made was Portal 2 11 years ago. PC gaming is an open platform, nothing is stopping Sony from making their own PC gaming hardware and they could very easily make all their exclusives come to PC day and date. They don't do this because this would be a bad business move. They release their games late on PC on purpose so people double-dip.
YukiOnna
Member
The deal is they're finally getting married.
bender
What time is it?
The Final Hours of Geoff Kojima.
Edgelord79
Gold Member
Correct. Karak had also hinted at something else that may be substantial incoming on his podcasts.
Bernkastel
Ask me about my fanboy energy!
Valve didn't like MS because back on the 360 they didn't want to let them update games with free content without getting paid, not sure if the relation has changed since. But back then it led to Gabe appearing on stage at Sony's E3 conference to tout the PS3 version of Portal 2 which would feature Steam integration.
Valve Reveals Portal 2 for PlayStation 3: Steam Details
A few months back, Valve announced some initial details of Steam's debut in the PS3 version of Portal 2. While people were excited to hear about the PS3 game's inclusion of Steam access to Portal 2 on any PC or Mac, they also had a bunch of questions. Portal 2 for PlayStation 3 is the [...]blog.playstation.com
It seems that Valve and Sony have enjoyed a good relationship since then with Sony games appearing on Steam and Alyx potentially being a launch title for PSVR2. That's why I think that if Valve did sell it would be to Sony rather than to MS. Since it's not publicly traded they can decide who buys them if they even decide to sell.
Using such an old story when we have a much more recent one.
Gabe Newell prefers Xbox Series X to PS5
https://www.vg247.com/2020/07/28/gabe-newell-xbox-series-x-over-ps5/ If he had to choose, the head of Valve would go for Xbox Series X over PS5. Valve co-founder Gabe Newell has been stuck in New Zealand since the coronavirus outbreak. When the team wrapped up on Half-Life: Alyx, Newell...
You really are thinking about this too emotionally. From "Valve is only worth 12 billion" to now this. You even think they won't negotiate or offer a deal to Microsoft first.
Versus MS who releases everything day 1 on steam.
Now you are just adding rumors to feel better.
This guy actually thinks they won't evevn negotiate with Microsoft over something like that. Oh but "Valve decides who buys them" is a good reason to write a fanfic.
Andodalf
Banned
Nobody wants them without their IP
Lupin25
Member
Situations involving acquisitions and other business-related transactions are known WELL in advance.
Conglomerates as big as Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft are seeing developments transpire months/years before we do.
Panic buys are not what huge, forward-thinking successful companies tend to do.
Conglomerates as big as Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft are seeing developments transpire months/years before we do.
Panic buys are not what huge, forward-thinking successful companies tend to do.
Last edited:
SlicedBread3
Member
I share your dream OP. However this is all happening alongside a transition towards games being tied to subscription services rather than hardware platforms. So I fear this will bring first party studios down to current third party quality as opposed to elevating them like you're hoping for.
It'll become less about trying to create experiences to show off what your platform can do and more about who can get the most addictive Skinner box playable on Grandma's toaster in China.
It'll become less about trying to create experiences to show off what your platform can do and more about who can get the most addictive Skinner box playable on Grandma's toaster in China.
blacktout
Member
What's funny is that while discourse about these acquisitions almost exclusively happens through a console war lens, it's increasingly clear that the actual reason Microsoft and Sony are engaging in these spending sprees is because they're preparing for the post-console future. They're trying to figure out how to create platforms and services that transcend the old "whatever box is in your living room governs what you play" paradigm. Microsoft clearly wants GamePass on everything (including PS5 and Switch) and Sony's "Bungie will remain multiplatform" statement hints that they're building some bigger box-neutral service as well. Most motherfuckers here are fighting the last war.
That said, who knows what Nintendo's doing/planning. Seems like they've largely rebuffed Microsoft's attempts to get GamePass on Switch so far, and their own subscription service is obviously a mess and still in its infancy. But then Nintendo is cleaning up with their current approach and has always been an idiosyncratic and opaque black box as far as strategy is concerned.
Last edited:
aclar00
Member
Neither, Sony did it for the mula and possibly sharing of resources and technologies.
The closest reasoning Sony would due this for "powa" is to have their games (even if only Bungie's) on mutiple consoles, however, Playstation Studios logo will likely not be on Bungie games. This is probably what Sony wants too. They get the mula without being directly associated with their rivals ecosystem.
The closest reasoning Sony would due this for "powa" is to have their games (even if only Bungie's) on mutiple consoles, however, Playstation Studios logo will likely not be on Bungie games. This is probably what Sony wants too. They get the mula without being directly associated with their rivals ecosystem.
splattered
Member
Not necessarily.. they would retain Mortal Kombat but lose Batman licensing right? Rocksteady just as a developer would be immensely valuable with or without the Batman/DC stuff.
Interfectum
Member
Nintendo can ride out this storm pretty easily with another, more powerful Switch and more of the same games they've been making so far.
This might actually play to Nintendo's benefit as these giants trip over themselves spending billions on devs, streaming and subscriptions... They can see how this trend all shakes out and jump on 10+ years later with their shit.
Woopah
Member
It would only be insider trading if Grubb actually bought/sold shares in the companies. He also hasn't given any specifics publicly.
VulcanRaven
Member
Maybe buy Capcom and make more Dino Crisis games.
Last edited:
LordBlodgett
Member
Does anyone really pay more for their streaming content than when they had cable? I was an early adopter, cut cable back in 2010. At the time I was on some mid tier cable package plus internet for like $110 a month. Now I pay like $55 for internet, $15 for Netflix, $8 for Disney, and $10 for Amazon. That's $88 a month and I don't have to deal with commercials, DVRs, cable boxes, contracts with cancellation fees, and I get the content I want on demand. Sometimes I cancel my Netflix when we aren't watching enough, and other times I've subscribed to Hulu, HBO, or Paramount when I want to watch a series or movie. It makes no sense to pine for the days of monolithic cable companies charging you $65-100 bucks to get a bunch of shit you never watch, to have it be infested with commercials, and to not be able to cancel at will.
Even if we have five different gaming subscription companies in the future things are not getting worse. You can subscribe and cancel at will. You will still be able to purchase games separately. It's just like people pining for the old days of gaming with physical only games, game rentals being the only way to try something, game magazines being our only source of news, and 900 numbers existing for game tips. All of those things are worse than what we have now.....
MikeM
Member
Its getting to the point that PC might be the best option (ignoring cost).
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
They can't acquire Valve because then they could be looking at serious anti-trust monopoly investigations. Steam makes up at least 90% of PC game software sales (it's probably slightly more now; GOG's been suffering lately), so that revenue combined with PlayStation's revenue would likely easily put them out as the #1 gaming division, ahead of Tencent, and give them an even larger slice of the gaming market.
But the sheer marketshare of Steam would have regulators thinking long and hard about how any other company acquiring them would intend to leverage that platform. Growing something like Steam to where it is now from grassroots, the way Valve did, is perfectly fine. They obviously have way more than 51% of the PC games market, but it's because they offered the best storefront. Someone else sweeping in and purchasing Valve, thereby just buying up that PC storefront marketshare, isn't exactly something regulators turn a blind eye to, since it's not the type of "natural" competition they favor in a capitalist market.
Doesn't mean it couldn't happen, but it'd be a virtually nil chance of it occurring. Same can be said for another company like Microsoft if they were to try acquiring Valve, it'd just bring too much hassle. That said, if we're talking about Sony and PC storefronts, since they are expanding into the PC space and (IMO) they wouldn't want to do Day 1 on PC unless they can lock down a storefront for themselves, I think finding a way to get at GOG (whether a strategic partnership or acquisition) would be a business move towards ensuring that.
With a storefront infrastructure and launcher already there in GOG and GOG Galaxy, Sony could just integrate their own features and technologies on top of that, probably leverage some of Bungie's tech in that, and just rebrand it as a PlayStation Storefront & Launcher for PC. Find a way to monetize it with different tiered subscription plans: a "Free" plan that's ad-supported, and other plans that remove ads and adds in PS+ and PS Now perks for users on PC that can be leveraged on PC and PlayStation consoles. With their own storefront, they keep 100% of 1P software sales profits, and they can also incentivize PS devs/pubs to effortlessly provide PC versions of their games on their storefront. Not to mention the various PS1/2/3/PSP/Vita games they can introduce for streaming on cheaper tiers and potential native play on the higher tiers.
I think once they do this, Sony finally does Day-and-Date on PlayStation and PC, for all of their games. Because by that point they can cover any "lost" console sales from converts going PC, through subscription plans on their storefront/launcher. The only potential trouble point would be if Sony's willing to provide cross-buy type of support for games between PlayStation and their PC storefront. I think they may do that for those who set up their subscriptions with a PlayStation console, which could basically extend equivalent privileges between the PlayStation and PC accounts for the same user.
Basically, every Spartacus account created on a PlayStation unlocks the equivalent on PC and users can share & transfer owned games, Trophies etc. between them, and you pay for them as if they are the same one account. However, an account made on PC requires a nominal small fee when sharing it to a PlayStation console to unlock similar shared file usage & perks between the PC side and PlayStation side (though things like cross-platform play is available regardless by default).
They could either enter a tight partnership or acquire CDPR/GOG for this, or partner with EGS to do such, tho in the latter's case it'd be a bit difficult because IIRC Epic lowered their cut of 3P revenue to 10% or something, they probably can't go back and increase that cut to the usual 30% and even if they did, they'd still probably want 10% so Sony just collects the 20% instead. So going after GOG wholesale would actually work out better for them, plus it has more of a footprint and legacy than EGS in the storefront space. Nothing compared to Steam, of course, but it'd be enough to get started, IMO.
But the sheer marketshare of Steam would have regulators thinking long and hard about how any other company acquiring them would intend to leverage that platform. Growing something like Steam to where it is now from grassroots, the way Valve did, is perfectly fine. They obviously have way more than 51% of the PC games market, but it's because they offered the best storefront. Someone else sweeping in and purchasing Valve, thereby just buying up that PC storefront marketshare, isn't exactly something regulators turn a blind eye to, since it's not the type of "natural" competition they favor in a capitalist market.
Doesn't mean it couldn't happen, but it'd be a virtually nil chance of it occurring. Same can be said for another company like Microsoft if they were to try acquiring Valve, it'd just bring too much hassle. That said, if we're talking about Sony and PC storefronts, since they are expanding into the PC space and (IMO) they wouldn't want to do Day 1 on PC unless they can lock down a storefront for themselves, I think finding a way to get at GOG (whether a strategic partnership or acquisition) would be a business move towards ensuring that.
With a storefront infrastructure and launcher already there in GOG and GOG Galaxy, Sony could just integrate their own features and technologies on top of that, probably leverage some of Bungie's tech in that, and just rebrand it as a PlayStation Storefront & Launcher for PC. Find a way to monetize it with different tiered subscription plans: a "Free" plan that's ad-supported, and other plans that remove ads and adds in PS+ and PS Now perks for users on PC that can be leveraged on PC and PlayStation consoles. With their own storefront, they keep 100% of 1P software sales profits, and they can also incentivize PS devs/pubs to effortlessly provide PC versions of their games on their storefront. Not to mention the various PS1/2/3/PSP/Vita games they can introduce for streaming on cheaper tiers and potential native play on the higher tiers.
I think once they do this, Sony finally does Day-and-Date on PlayStation and PC, for all of their games. Because by that point they can cover any "lost" console sales from converts going PC, through subscription plans on their storefront/launcher. The only potential trouble point would be if Sony's willing to provide cross-buy type of support for games between PlayStation and their PC storefront. I think they may do that for those who set up their subscriptions with a PlayStation console, which could basically extend equivalent privileges between the PlayStation and PC accounts for the same user.
Basically, every Spartacus account created on a PlayStation unlocks the equivalent on PC and users can share & transfer owned games, Trophies etc. between them, and you pay for them as if they are the same one account. However, an account made on PC requires a nominal small fee when sharing it to a PlayStation console to unlock similar shared file usage & perks between the PC side and PlayStation side (though things like cross-platform play is available regardless by default).
They could either enter a tight partnership or acquire CDPR/GOG for this, or partner with EGS to do such, tho in the latter's case it'd be a bit difficult because IIRC Epic lowered their cut of 3P revenue to 10% or something, they probably can't go back and increase that cut to the usual 30% and even if they did, they'd still probably want 10% so Sony just collects the 20% instead. So going after GOG wholesale would actually work out better for them, plus it has more of a footprint and legacy than EGS in the storefront space. Nothing compared to Steam, of course, but it'd be enough to get started, IMO.
Interfectum
Member
No doubt the best option for gaming going forward is a PC + Switch.
ShirAhava
Plays with kids toys, in the adult gaming world
Back when new games were good enough to argue about? that was a long time ago
onesvenus
Member
Yup, that Xbox players needed to buy a PS console to play SF5 and FF7R was Microsoft fault. Absolutely.
Portugeezer
Member
He heard from Grubb.
lol, I mean it makes sense for Sony and Epic Games, but come on... Valve.
nikolino840
Member
Yeah but journous like shreier are not of the same advice
Knightime_X
Member
The base value is not all you have to pay.
A company could be worth 1b but you would need to fork over 13b for other reasons.
Just because something is valued at X doesn't mean its for sale at X value cap.
Y and Z equations also play a role, raising (or lowering) the price significantly.
A company could be worth 1b but you would need to fork over 13b for other reasons.
Just because something is valued at X doesn't mean its for sale at X value cap.
Y and Z equations also play a role, raising (or lowering) the price significantly.
Last edited:
Calling 911 Melts Beams
Banned
i secretly bought valve for 45 dollars
Knightime_X
Member
Remember when MS tried with Nintendo in the early 00's?
Repeat that reaction with anyone and valve today.
Also, just because it's valued at something doesn't mean you'll be able to buy at that price. lol no
Repeat that reaction with anyone and valve today.
Also, just because it's valued at something doesn't mean you'll be able to buy at that price. lol no
bender
What time is it?
Arguing about minor differences in resolution, framerate and shadow quality of middling games we have no interest in playing is much more interesting anyway.
cireza
Member
You actually have no clue either.
Men_in_Boxes
Snake Oil Salesman
I'd give Valve 12 billion without hesitation.
CheeseCake
Member
Wouldn't go well for Microsoft, since they're currently busy getting their Activision buyout approved by the government.
Negotiator101
Member
Yeah this is a reaction to the Zenimax deal, there is no reaction to the Activision deal as it is too massive for Sony to counter.
Chittagong
Gold Member
This is me every time I go diving. When I climb back on the boat and check my phone, it’s BOOM Microsoft bought Activision, BOOM Sony bought Bungie
DarthPutin
Member
Certainly more buy-outs are coming, but isn't he saying "video game deals?" Sounds more like temp exclusives a-la Kotor and the like?.. Is the board so traumatized all we hear is "acquisitions"?
Publishers buyouts would also be above Geoff's paygrade, while game releases/premiers absolutely would not.
Publishers buyouts would also be above Geoff's paygrade, while game releases/premiers absolutely would not.
Shifty1897
Member
It's going to get reviewed, nothing will come from it. Move along.
Cyberpunkd
Member
HerjansEagleFeeder
Member
Thanks, now I'll surely have nightmares.
Deerock71
Member
I belive we're in the 'bargaining' phase of the 5 stages of grief.