Support NeoGAF

[Docwiz2]

Sony does have legitimate leverage against Microsoft now. Don't underestimate the power of the platform and Sony marketing to preferentially promote Destiny and other Bungie games over titles they used to heavily promote like CoD.

The biggest risk to MS is that they lose relevance with their brands from Activision. Sony can do a whole lot to further marketing/promotion of Bungie games. If Microsoft removes CoD, or even parts of the CoD franchise from 70% of their playerbase, it begins to erode their userbase and the fans may move on to something else.

Before the Bungie deal, they didn't really have a feather in their cap, staple FPS franchise to promote in the future as their big game to rally the entire platform/ecosystem behind.

And GaaS titles can lose relevance without the cross-platform network effects. Something to think about

Sony has NO LEVERAGE over Xbox. You guys have no idea what you are talking about. Sony buying Bungie had conditions and one was to be able to have complete autonomy on their own publishing decisions.

Didn't you guys read the Bungie FAQ? Don't know know that Bungie gets to determine their own publishing and not have Sony involved????

You guys are an epic train wreck of just nonsense.

So, all future games will be on Xbox. The only reason why this deal was done was for two main reasons. One was to help Sony be able to obtain knowledge from Bungie about live games and secondly, Sony's future may be in a third party publisher, we will have to see on the last one over time.

Sony is scared and rightly so about the chips, China is looking to take over Taiwan and Russia is looking to take over Ukraine. They are working together as they have similar things going on.

This isn't the 1980's or 1990's anymore people, wake up!

The days of chips everywhere, maybe over. This is a different time we are in. Microsoft via cloud and Maybe Sony as well too. The local console days might be over in the near future.

 

[CrashNBurn_281]

I do not see Microsoft making Call of Duty exclusive to Xbox. For one it's a juggernaut and having it everywhere will rake in the money.

Not to mention making it exclusive would probably make the deal harder to go through with the FTC.

They can make certain things in COD exclusive that could pull some PlayStation owners over, but I do not see Phil doing that either.

The real play here is Series S and that much more content for Gamepass. With Bethesda, Activision, Blizzard, and Xbox games Studios games day one on Gamepass it's a heavy sell. No one in their right mind could argue it would be the absolute best deal in gaming.

You might not get a ton of invested PlayStation players to abandon Sony. How many might just pick up a cheap Series S and sub to Gamepass?

As for the other ActiBlizz titles, the ones without contracts will probably be exclusive.

 

[KingGhidorah]

It's a bit more complicated. Sony does NOT own the assets outright, they are the sole shareholder of a legally separate entity. The relationship is not the same as a studio such as Guerilla or Housemarque, etc.



Who is "they" and what would they be leaving with?

they is Bungie, MS bought them, and they still left..... then they left partnership with Activision

they got no loyalty

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

Call of duty was more popular due to xbox. Xbox owning them, means the old call of duty would be back. That what call of duty players will think. Call of duty had its highest popularity during x360.

Now days, its Yearly release, with people hating the game nonstop. Even gaffers here, would love to go back to that period.

Also, new GAAS game is hard these days. You either have to be lucky like Fortnite, or Have the chance to be made by studios like respawn. Tons of gaas games comes in to light, and die very fast.

COD was way more popular(sold more) during the last gen than the 360 era.

 

[TheTony316]

that's because Bungie's history, the moment they're not happy, they could just pack their bags and leave

Bungie can't just leave. Sony owns them 100%. The only way they can leave is, if Sony let's them. When Bungie left MS, it was because MS agreed.

 

[Tomeru]

they is Bungie, MS bought them, and they still left..... then they left partnership with Activision

they got no loyalty

I dont think AV owned them. They had a publishing deal.

Someone correct me on this please.

 

[ChiefDada]

I dont think AV owned them. They had a publishing deal.

Someone correct me on this please.

Impossible because you're correct.

 

[dotnotbot]

I dont think AV owned them. They had a publishing deal.

Someone correct me on this please.

Lol, that actually changes a lot. Tears apart the narrative of the scammy illoyal Bungie that will leave whenever they want.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

That's not what I said.

Microsoft making some portions of CoD exclusive makes them less relevant, and that sort of hard break transition opens up not only Bungie but all these other partnerships to get preferential treatment now on their platform. That's why Bungie stated they want to remain multiplatform - GaaS makes no sense with artificial barriers preventing widespread viral adoption.

Essentially - is the Playstation userbase THAT dependent on CoD, or are they more likely to move on if it's not so heavily marketed on their platform? I guess that's the question.

Actually from what I see around me at least for casuals PUBG, Fortnite, FIFA, and eFootball are the main games. COD have already lost its importance around here, at least.

Also people inside the US might not know that Xbox has zero marketing and no official vendors in many countries. On the other hand, PS is in your face all the time while watching football, or even surfing youtube. So if they got another shooter next to Destiny, as I agree that Destiny is still a different genre in shooters, they would market the hell out of it and casuals are so easy to manipulate.

 

[Docwiz2]

Actually from what I see around me at least for casuals PUBG, Fortnite, FIFA, and eFootball are the main games. COD have already lost its importance around here, at least.

Also people inside the US might not know that Xbox has zero marketing and no official vendors in many countries. On the other hand, PS is in your face all the time while watching football, or even surfing youtube. So if they got another shooter next to Destiny, as I agree that Destiny is still a different genre in shooters, they would market the hell out of it and casuals are so easy to manipulate.

Who cares if COD lost relevance in this place as it's a "Bubble". The country thing is changing, ask Phil about that. IGN asked this last year about other countries.

 

[Thirty7ven]

It's a bit more complicated. Sony does NOT own the assets outright, they are the sole shareholder of a legally separate entity. The relationship is not the same as a studio such as Guerilla or Housemarque, etc.

That’s how you buy an employee owned company.

It’s no different from Aniplex, in terms of SIE, and Bungie is now an wholly owned subsidiary of Sony.

It’s impressive how whenever it’s PlayStation related people jump through all sorts of hoops. Like with Death Stranding when people said Sony didn’t own the IP just because they weren’t publishing the game on PC. And now just because people are befuddled about Sony structuring a deal that aims to preserve Bungie talent at the company, and a company structure that allows them to continue doing what they are doing and growing, they are saying all these weird fantasies.

Yes it’s not just an IP grab, shock and awe.

 

[bushwookie]

Actually from what I see around me at least for casuals PUBG, Fortnite, FIFA, and eFootball are the main games. COD have already lost its importance around here, at least.

Also people inside the US might not know that Xbox has zero marketing and no official vendors in many countries. On the other hand, PS is in your face all the time while watching football, or even surfing youtube. So if they got another shooter next to Destiny, as I agree that Destiny is still a different genre in shooters, they would market the hell out of it and casuals are so easy to manipulate.

Yeah, no.

You start by claiming "COD have already lost it's importance around here, at least." as if your specific location reflects the larger worldwide market.

That's immediately followed by you informing those inside the US that the Xbox literally doesn't exist in many countries, to suggest that all PS has to do is market some unforeseen FPS that doesn't exist, and voila... it just works.

The numbers are available for everyone to see. Who exactly do you think is going to buy any of what you're selling here?

 

[TheTony316]

they is Bungie, MS bought them, and they still left..... then they left partnership with Activision

they got no loyalty

Microsoft let them leave. If Sony says nope, they can't do sh*t

 

[ChiefDada]

That’s how you buy an employee owned company.

It’s no different from Aniplex, in terms of SIE, and Bungie is now an wholly owned subsidiary of Sony.

It’s impressive how whenever it’s PlayStation related people jump through all sorts of hoops. Like with Death Stranding when people said Sony didn’t own the IP just because they weren’t publishing the game on PC. And now just because people are befuddled about Sony structuring a deal that aims to preserve Bungie talent at the company, and a company structure that allows them to continue doing what they are doing and growing, they are saying all these weird fantasies.

Yes it’s not just an IP grab, shock and awe.

I mean, I don't know what to tell you other than what I said. They don't own the IP outright. They own the corporation that owns the IP. I know it may sound semantical but it's the key distinction that prevents Sony from having unilateral control over individual assets within Bungie Corp. It is relatively more complex than previous acquisitions we've seen in the past.

And it is completely different from Aniplex. Aniplex was created as a JV within Sony Group and was never a standalone corporate legal entity.

 

[bushwookie]

That’s how you buy an employee owned company.

It’s no different from Aniplex, in terms of SIE, and Bungie is now an wholly owned subsidiary of Sony.

It’s impressive how whenever it’s PlayStation related people jump through all sorts of hoops. Like with Death Stranding when people said Sony didn’t own the IP just because they weren’t publishing the game on PC. And now just because people are befuddled about Sony structuring a deal that aims to preserve Bungie talent at the company, and a company structure that allows them to continue doing what they are doing and growing, they are saying all these weird fantasies.

Yes it’s not just an IP grab, shock and awe.

To be fair, only one claim can be correct. Either the Bungie deal is similarly structured to the other acquisitions we've seen over the past couple of years... Or it's not, and there are significant differences comparatively.

The two most often made claims are,

• Sony owns Bungie lock, stock, and barrel. They can do whatever they like with both Bungie as well as any games it makes, including Destiny.

• Sony owns Bungie, but there are significant differences between this purchase compared to deals we've seen in the past. The claimed differences vary a bit, but most are centered around Bungie's ability to self publish titles, future releases being multiplatform, and the destiny IP itself.

So which one is it?

One of the two is far more correct than the other. You're suggesting that those who believe the latter option to be the case are "befuddled", and having "weird fantasies". So I take it you believe the situation to be more akin to the former option then?

 

[Alphagear]

Bungie can't just leave. Sony owns them 100%. The only way they can leave is, if Sony let's them. When Bungie left MS, it was because MS agreed.

People talking here as though Sony and Bungie married each other.

Sony bought Bungie. They own them and can do as they please.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Yeah, no.

You start by claiming "COD have already lost it's importance around here, at least." as if your specific location reflects the larger worldwide market.

That's immediately followed by you informing those inside the US that the Xbox literally doesn't exist in many countries, to suggest that all PS has to do is market some unforeseen FPS that doesn't exist, and voila... it just works.

The numbers are available for everyone to see. Who exactly do you think is going to buy any of what you're selling here?

All will be clear in the upcoming years without Sony giving CoD a "gentlemen" agreement of not competing directly with it. If Warzone is gone as well casuals won't really care and shift to available, more popular IP's like PUBG, Fortnite.

 

[Thirty7ven]

MS sold Bungie to its employees and kept the IP because that was the only thing that mattered to Xbox management at the time, which is obvious because Halo was the only thing they allowed them to work on. They were going to lose the studio, possibly even have to close it.

Insiders, and I’m talking about Xbox insiders had multiple reports last year about Phil wanting to buy Bungie, with multiple talks having taken place about a possible deal. Why Bungie talent didn’t want to join Xbox studios? Probably because of their history, and probably because they didn’t want to be another pawn for a subscription.

And studios that aren’t on the ropes in terms of finances actually get to chose their fate.

Why did George Lucas sell Star Wars to Disney and not another studio? Because he believed they were the ones that would better preserve Lucasfilm instead of stripping it for parts.

Bungie is no different, and considering the ambitions for the studio is to become a transmedia company, that will extend their IP to movies, animation, tv shows, why the hell would they go with MS?

To be fair, only one claim can be correct. Either the Bungie deal is similarly structured to the other acquisitions we've seen over the past couple of years... Or it's not, and there are significant differences comparatively.

The two most often made claims are,

• Sony owns Bungie lock, stock, and barrel. They can do whatever they like with both Bungie as well as any games it makes, including Destiny.

• Sony owns Bungie, but there are significant differences between this purchase compared to deals we've seen in the past. The claimed differences vary a bit, but most are centered around Bungie's ability to self publish titles, future releases being multiplatform, and the destiny IP itself.

So which one is it?

One of the two is far more correct than the other. You're suggesting that those who believe the latter option to be the case are "befuddled", and having "weird fantasies". So I take it you believe the situation to be more akin to the former option then?

If I have ten possible suitors to buy my business, and what I want the most is to preserve the culture I created, who do I sell it to? To the buyer that not only will pay the price in $, but that will also convince me that they want to preserve the culture I created.

Which is why Sony is paying 1.2 billion throughout the years in deferred and conditional payments to Bungie’s employees and letting them be independent from PlayStation. Keyword is PlayStation, they are inside SIE umbrella. People are mistaking SIE for PlayStation.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

MS sold Bungie to its employees and kept the IP because that was the only thing that mattered to Xbox management at the time, which is obvious because Halo was the only thing they allowed them to work on. They were going to lose the studio, possibly even have to close it.

Insiders, and I’m talking about Xbox insiders had multiple reports last year about Phil wanting to buy Bungie, with multiple talks having taken place about a possible deal. Why Bungie talent didn’t want to join Xbox studios? Probably because of their history, and probably because they didn’t want to be another pawn for a subscription.

And studios that aren’t on the ropes in terms of finances actually get to chose their fate.

Why did George Lucas sell Star Wars to Disney and not another studio? Because he believed they were the ones that would better preserve Lucasfilm instead of stripping it for parts.

Bungie is no different, and considering the ambitions for the studio is to become a transmedia company, that will extend their IP to movies, animation, tv shows, why the hell would they go with MS?

Or, Sony simply outbid MS and MS didn't think Bungie was worth the money.

 

[bitbydeath]

To be fair, only one claim can be correct. Either the Bungie deal is similarly structured to the other acquisitions we've seen over the past couple of years... Or it's not, and there are significant differences comparatively.

The two most often made claims are,

• Sony owns Bungie lock, stock, and barrel. They can do whatever they like with both Bungie as well as any games it makes, including Destiny.

• Sony owns Bungie, but there are significant differences between this purchase compared to deals we've seen in the past. The claimed differences vary a bit, but most are centered around Bungie's ability to self publish titles, future releases being multiplatform, and the destiny IP itself.

So which one is it?

One of the two is far more correct than the other. You're suggesting that those who believe the latter option to be the case are "befuddled", and having "weird fantasies". So I take it you believe the situation to be more akin to the former option then?

Both are true.
Sony paid for Bungie in full and can do whatever they want with them. That includes giving them independence (as they have) and taking it away.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Who cares if COD lost relevance in this place as it's a "Bubble". The country thing is changing, ask Phil about that. IGN asked this last year about other countries.

Casuals enter a gaming shop, find only PS4/5 and their games, gaming PC parts, Nintendo Switch and games, and extremely rarely an Xbox that has been bought from a scalper from the US and most of the time with no discs. So what do you think the casual will do? Buy a console where he can't trade his discs, or pay $180/year upfront for a service that doesn't work locally and you need to maneuver and workaround? Also with zero localization (language barrier). You need to get off your bubble. US market is huge, but it's not THE WORLD.

 

[ChiefDada]

Or, Sony simply outbid MS and MS didn't think Bungie was worth the money.

Highly doubtful and borderline inconceivable given what we know.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Highly doubtful and borderline inconceivable given what we know.

Yes, I also prefer fan fiction where Sony are the obvious good guys and MS are the bad guys so of course Bungie went with the good guys.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Highly doubtful and borderline inconceivable given what we know.

Not to the likes of him, that only understand the power of the almighty dollar. Of course he won’t be able to explain how all that money wasn’t enough to turn 343i into something else, or how The Initiative bled most of its talent so much so that they had to go and rent SE’s “crown jewel” to work on PD. It’s hard for some people to understand that money is only part of it.

Not a surprise though, a lot of people sell themselves short. Still funny though, having to save face “it’s because Phil didn’t think they were worth the money” ahahaha

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Sony are the obvious good guys and MS are the bad guys so of course Bungie went with the good guys.

 

[SSfox]

I really can't wait to know who's next Sony purchase, hopefully something not lame.

But I'll say this again, Sony are gonna survive and be totally fine without Bethesda and Activition, i mean it's still a lost, but Sony will still be totally fine without those still, but if somebody else than Sony that will aquire the top Japanese publishers and studios, this will be the slow beginning of the end of the Playstation era.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

or how The Initiative bled most of its talent

More tales from your behind.

 

[TheTony316]

I really can't wait to know who's next Sony purchase, hopefully something not lame.

But I'll say this again, Sony are gonna survive and be totally fine without Bethesda and Activition, i mean it's still a lost, but Sony will still be totally fine without those still, but if somebody else than Sony that will aquire the top Japanese publishers and studios, this will be the slow beginning of the end of the Playstation era.

Square Enix would make the most sense and then maybe Kadokawa.

 

[MOTM]

You think they have a contract with Sony committing them to make games for Xbox? Laughable

They have committed to supporting Destiny on the platforms it is on and their next game will be multiplatform - which doesn't necessarily need to include Xbox

Im sure there's a chance it comes to Xbox, so long as MS allow PSN/Spartacus functionality

LMAO

They'll come to Xbox day one in the traditional manner alright.

 

[MOTM]

Was listening to Last Stand Media Defining Duke analysis on this deal, and it’s unbelievable how some are using all their brain into twisting this deal into something that isn’t. The amount of copium is off the charts, they even go as far as sourcing Devin as some sort of contract expert. Apparently it’s really hard for some people to accept that Sony actually owns Bungie, that they actually own their assets instead of this “Sony is paying for Bungie’s friendship” shit.

Copium .. for Bungie .. the Destiny franchine .. ? And all their future games staying multiplat? You can't be serious.

What is there to cope about?

 

[ChiefDada]

Both are true.
Sony paid for Bungie in full and can do whatever they want with them. That includes giving them independence (as they have) and taking it away.

This isn't true. If this were the case, then Sony would retire the stock post-acquisition and Bungie would be similar to the other PS studios, but instead the stock will continue to exist, thus the corporate entity still exists. What you're describing is what will happen to Activision after their deal with Microsoft closes.

Yes, I also prefer fan fiction where Sony are the obvious good guys and MS are the bad guys so of course Bungie went with the good guys.

I don't even know what you're trying to say here. I am primarily interested in these types of conversations as someone who works in M&A, the fact that I play video games just makes it a bit more exciting. It's not a "good guy vs bad guy issue", it's about good fit. Bungie desired autonomy and Sony was willing to work and get a deal. I personally feel it was very smart on Sony's part and will pay off big-time in the medium to long-term.

 

[Majukun]

Sony has NO LEVERAGE over Xbox. You guys have no idea what you are talking about. Sony buying Bungie had conditions and one was to be able to have complete autonomy on their own publishing decisions.

Didn't you guys read the Bungie FAQ? Don't know know that Bungie gets to determine their own publishing and not have Sony involved????

You guys are an epic train wreck of just nonsense.

So, all future games will be on Xbox. The only reason why this deal was done was for two main reasons. One was to help Sony be able to obtain knowledge from Bungie about live games and secondly, Sony's future may be in a third party publisher, we will have to see on the last one over time.

Sony is scared and rightly so about the chips, China is looking to take over Taiwan and Russia is looking to take over Ukraine. They are working together as they have similar things going on.

This isn't the 1980's or 1990's anymore people, wake up!

The days of chips everywhere, maybe over. This is a different time we are in. Microsoft via cloud and Maybe Sony as well too. The local console days might be over in the near future.

much like ms buying actibliz and keeping cod and other on sony consoles makes little sense, so does sony buying bungie for 3.6 bln and not having word on what they do.

i'm no economist, so maybe i'm missing something in both cases, but exclusivity seems like the logical cobsequence of both deals.

this being said, even with exclusivity, i very much doubt that destiny alone is enough for a leverage compared to all the franchises the actibliz deal brought..maybe for cod, but i get the feeling the cod franchise is bigger anyway

 

[Thirty7ven]

Hoeg's Law video on employee retention bonuses(Bungie) made me laugh because there's a moment where he screencaps a SejuntsoSange(?) tweet, one of neogaf's most renowned patron of the green arts, and calls him either obtuse or intentionally obtuse.

YO take a bow!




edit:

This isn't true. If this were the case, then Sony would retire the stock post-acquisition and Bungie would be similar to the other PS studios, but instead the stock will continue to exist, thus the corporate entity still exists. What you're describing is what will happen to Activision after their deal with Microsoft closes.

And what could possibly stop an entity that owns 100% of a company's stock from changing the board in the future or retire the stock?

You seem to be arguing that Sony will forever have to keep Bungie as is, otherwise somebody will sue them. Who?

 

[MOTM]

much like ms buying actibliz and keeping cod and other on sony consoles makes little sense, so does sony buying bungie for 3.6 bln and not having word on what they do.

i'm no economist, so maybe i'm missing something in both cases, but exclusivity seems like the logical cobsequence of both deals.

this being said, even with exclusivity, i very much doubt that destiny alone is enough for a leverage compared to all the franchises the actibliz deal brought..maybe for cod, but i get the feeling the cod franchise is bigger anyway

I'll take Sony and Bungies words on the matter thank you very much

PlayStation: Bungie deal is about multiplatform, live-service games

PlayStation's acquisition of Bungie may not result in exclusive PS5 games, but it will allow the platform holder to sig…

www.gamesindustry.biz

Bungie's Multiplatform Promise After Sony Acquisition Could Turn the Tables On Xbox

As Xbox Game Studios collect developers to expand Game Pass and drive players to Xbox, Sony acquires Bungie and allows them to be multiplatform.

gamerant.com

 

[Bernd Lauert]

This isn't true. If this were the case, then Sony would retire the stock post-acquisition and Bungie would be similar to the other PS studios, but instead the stock will continue to exist, thus the corporate entity still exists. What you're describing is what will happen to Activision after their deal with Microsoft closes.



I don't even know what you're trying to say here. I am primarily interested in these types of conversations as someone who works in M&A, the fact that I play video games just makes it a bit more exciting. It's not a "good guy vs bad guy issue", it's about good fit. Bungie desired autonomy and Sony was willing to work and get a deal. I personally feel it was very smart on Sony's part and will pay off big-time in the medium to long-term.

You work in M&A and you find it "borderline inconceivable" that Sony outbid MS? That take is even weirder now tbh.

 

[The_Mike]

Lmaoooooo this is a pure fuck you move and nothing else. Destiny 3 exclusive tho . With Activision ms has to keep some stuff multi with this Sony foes not. Still think Ms get was bigger and has a bigger appeal tho.

For people poking a little fun over the history of Bungie let's take a look at this.

They were bought by Microsoft and made a generation defining game in Halo.

Microsoft forced them to JUST make Halo games, which they didn't want to do. They wanted to work on other IP.

They bought their way out of Microsoft.

Destiny looks more like Bungie wanted halo to be lite mmorpg given the games looks a like.

Destiny 2 is literally halo with a hub.

Makes me really hyped to back to play Destiny 2… please please don’t disappoint me.

"huh, Sony bought Bungie? Oh yeah, they do make good games can't remember why I stopped playing but now I can't wait to get back"

Yeah, not surprised from the author.

Had to screencap this one. Made me chuckle.

The biggest question now is what Uncle Phil will play now? He is very addictive to Destiny 2… should him continue playing Sony’s Destiny 2?

It might surprise you...
But not everyone is a fanboy.
Spencer is not banned from PlayStation services so of course he will continue to play?

 

[Majukun]

I'll take Sony and Bungies words on the matter thank you very much

PlayStation: Bungie deal is about multiplatform, live-service games

PlayStation's acquisition of Bungie may not result in exclusive PS5 games, but it will allow the platform holder to sig…

www.gamesindustry.biz

Bungie's Multiplatform Promise After Sony Acquisition Could Turn the Tables On Xbox

As Xbox Game Studios collect developers to expand Game Pass and drive players to Xbox, Sony acquires Bungie and allows them to be multiplatform.

gamerant.com

from that point of view ms and actibliz as well strongly implied no exclusivity, yet lot of people, myself included, don't believe them.

we will see, as i said, it's possible that it all makes sense, just not to me

 

[bitbydeath]

This isn't true. If this were the case, then Sony would retire the stock post-acquisition and Bungie would be similar to the other PS studios, but instead the stock will continue to exist, thus the corporate entity still exists. What you're describing is what will happen to Activision after their deal with Microsoft closes.

You seem to be arguing that Sony didn’t buy Bungie and instead formed a partnership with them, but it’s already well documented that they did buy them.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Are you implying that Bungie finally found the love of their life, and they live happily married ever after?

Sounds good.

 

[ChiefDada]

And what could possibly stop an entity that owns 100% of a company's stock from changing the board in the future or retire the stock?

You seem to be arguing that Sony will forever have to keep Bungie as is, otherwise somebody will sue them. Who?

You are asking a brilliant (imo most important) question that none of us have the answer to right now, and will probably never have concrete answers unless contract leaks or there's a future contract dispute that plays out in court. Both parties have publicly stated that Bungie's independent board will remain. My guess is that there must be some contract stipulation for certain financial and/or operational conditions to be met/maintained in order for Sony to remain hands off. I have never seen anything in any of the engagements I've worked on, but I'm also not a contract lawyer so take it as you will...

You work in M&A and you find it "borderline inconceivable" that Sony outbid MS? That take is even weirder now tbh.

Go back and read your post.

Or, Sony simply outbid MS and MS didn't think Bungie was worth the money.

You were specifically referring to money. So yes, I find it highly unlikely that Sony, a $100b company, outbid Microsoft, a $2T company. However, I do believe that Sony outbid Microsoft in its concessions for independence. Money wasn't the dealmaker or deal breaker in this transaction. You are wrong to think that money is the sole motivation for all M&A deals. I have seen men leave upwards of $10 million on the table just to spite their brother/ex business partner.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Spencer is not banned from PlayStation services so of course he will continue to play?

Also Destiny 2 will stay on Xbox, so Papa Phil can keep playing on his XSS during boring team meetings.

 

[The_Mike]

Are you implying that Bungie finally found the love of their life, and they live happily married ever after?

Sounds good.

It's always good when a company thrive, and let's hope Sony forces them to up their quality from where they are now.

Given from posts like ethomaz ,it already happened so good for Bungie.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

You were specifically referring to money. So yes, I find it highly unlikely that Sony, a $100b company, outbid Microsoft, a $2T company. However, I do believe that Sony outbid Microsoft in its concessions for independence. Money wasn't the dealmaker or deal breaker in this transaction. You are wrong to think that money is the sole motivation for all M&A deals. I have seen men leave upwards of $10 million on the table just to spite their brother/ex business partner.

Why can't it be about money? Maybe MS thought Bungie are too expensive if they want to stay entirely independent. Sony thought it's still worth it because they need their know-how.

 

[ChiefDada]

You seem to be arguing that Sony will forever have to keep Bungie as is, otherwise somebody will sue them. Who?

Bungie management.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Bungie management.

On what grounds? They're just employees like the rest with no control over the company

 

[Thirty7ven]

Bungie management.

Which one?

 

[Bo_Hazem]

On what grounds? They're just employees like the rest with no control over the company

The crazy talk from those lovely people is off the roof. If there is any written contract would just be for the "people" inside the company, or the board. If Sony breaks the contract and it has payment compensation they'll get it and be replaced, same if they don't meet Sony's conditions of helping other PS studios with their GaaS they won't sniff shit from that extra $1.2B

Bungie got them spooked, imagine what later acquisitions would do to them. Poor souls.

 

[Bernkastel]

Why Bungie talent didn’t want to join Xbox studios?

Maybe you should ask yourself why Bungie talent didn't remain at Bungie. Theres not much difference between how many OG Halo devs that remained at Bungie or those that joined 343i. Its not much in either case, but in 343i's favour atleast its more recognizable figures that we associate with Halo like Joe or Ske7tch. And thats discounting Certain Affinity which is definitely working with Xbox on two projects. You think Bungie is some homogeneous entity and all there employees decided to change side at some point. A lot of the ex-Bungie staffs who remained until before Destiny's release never mention Destiny even though they had major roles in its development but gladly talk about there Halo days. I don't just mean the Marty and his lawsuit who made the Destiny 1 music, I also mean people like Joe Staten who wrote the originally 10 year story that you read in Destiny 1 Grimoires and the current canon is still based on what he wrote or Marcus Lehto who designed the original prototype for Destiny. These people left in bad blood because of their disagreements with Bungie management.
You associate buying a brand name with buying talent. For example Wizards of the Coast wanted Bioware talent so they bought Archetype Entertainment. Or Microsoft bought Obsidian and InXile and not Interplay.

 

[kingfey]

COD was way more popular(sold more) during the last gen than the 360 era.

Because last gen had more users, compared to x360.
X360 is what made the franchise popular. Without that, it wouldn't have been popular at all.

 

[ChiefDada]

Which one?

The management individuals that comprise the independent board of directors as of post acquisition.

On what grounds? They're just employees like the rest with no control over the company

They aren't just employees. A corporate board of directors has the fiduciary right to dictate how assets are utilized in a company. That generally includes IP. That is why corporate entity status is important. But Thirty7ven is right typically shareholders elect who is on the board. But based on how the deal has been described in terms of the way they stressed board independence, it is impossible for me to believe that Sony can make adjustments at will per contractual agreements. I have decent but limited working knowledge of corporate law due to tax implications of M&A deals so if there are any contract lawyers around who have seen such situations, I welcome additional insight.