• 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.

Microsoft—now trying to get its $75 billion deal for Activision approved—has taken a friendly role with regulators. (WSJ)

kingfey

Banned
I agree, the only major ip here is COD. But that’s going down the toilet with Warzone cannibalising the franchise sales. Of course Warzone itself is a money spinner, as are likely the mobile games. But as far as games for console gamers, where’s the golden egg?

MS would be better off having this fall apart and using the money more wisely, preferably creating studios and new mind blowing ip’s.
Microsoft is lacking global marketable IP. Activision-Blizzard's IPs are global phenomenal IPs. Especially on Asia and Europe. It will help them tremendously, and give them exposure they need for their brand.
 

Shmunter

Member
I don’t understand this point of view at all.

If you look at the Epic vs Apple lawsuit you have a clear ranking of gaming companies and their revenue. There were only three in the top 10 that were potentially purchase-able: AB (1.6B profit back then), EA (1.2B) and Epic (1.08B).

And since then AB has literally blown up their revenue, although it’s true most of the increase came from mobile (CoD Mobile and King). Compare the cost of purchase to revenue ratio of AB to other MS acquisitions like LinkedIn and you’ll see how much of a bargain it was.

Microsoft is lacking global marketable IP. Activision-Blizzard's IPs are global phenomenal IPs. Especially on Asia and Europe. It will help them tremendously, and give them exposure they need for their brand.
When I look at AB and ask myself the question - which upcoming game am I literally shaking for right now, I’ve got nothing. What have you got, there may be something I’m forgetting?
 

Chukhopops

Member
When I look at AB and ask myself the question - which upcoming game am I literally shaking for right now, I’ve got nothing. What have you got, there may be something I’m forgetting?
I’m talking about financials in my post and why it makes sense for MS to buy a company that makes almost as much gaming profit as its own gaming division.

But to answer your question, Overwatch 2 and Diablo IV are both very interesting to me considering how much time I’ve spent on Overwatch and D3:RoS. Oh and D2:Resurrected is one of the best remasters ever made.
 
Last edited:

Shmunter

Member
I’m talking about financials in my post and why it makes sense for MS to buy a company that makes almost as much gaming profit as its own gaming division.

But to answer your question, Overwatch 2 and Diablo IV are both very interesting to me considering how much time I’ve spent on Overwatch and D3:RoS. Oh and D2:Resurrected is one of the best remasters ever made.
Personally don’t like either of those, but that’s completely down to the individual - so I’m where I was.

But even with those 2, that 70b isn’t going far you personally. Especially if you factor in you would get those as 3rd party games either way. Circling back, 70b could actually create a whole portfolio of brand new AAA ip’s resulting in a net positive vs net 0……from a gamers perspective.
 

kingfey

Banned
When I look at AB and ask myself the question - which upcoming game am I literally shaking for right now, I’ve got nothing. What have you got, there may be something I’m forgetting?
Diablo 4, overwatch 2. Those 2 are the big stand out.
Then there is the annual COD, and some remakes from old cod games.
 

The_Mike

Member
I agree, the only major ip here is COD. But that’s going down the toilet with Warzone cannibalising the franchise sales. Of course Warzone itself is a money spinner, as are likely the mobile games. But as far as games for console gamers, where’s the golden egg?

MS would be better off having this fall apart and using the money more wisely, preferably creating studios and new mind blowing ip’s.

Call of duty is still in top 5 under games sold, and that's the main IP.

Call of duty is in a spot where they don't have any competition at all. Battlefield were somewhat in the past but the franchise is no longer relevant.

Theres hype around Diablo 4,and while world of Warcraft is far from its prime time its still one of the most popular mmos, because that genre is filled with Korean cash grab fillers.

Call of duty is a platform seller, as it caters to a wide group of fps gamers.
 

Kerotan

Member
"Rivals say he is also skilled at directing negative attention toward competitors—to Microsoft’s benefit".

They are also very sheaky and do this with Sony. When Xbox looked like it could beat PlayStation with the 360 they didn't allow cross play despite Sony wanting to do it. But a generation later when Sony took the same approach MS kept on publicly criticizing Sony despite Sony not criticizing them constantly the previous generation.

The same thing with the whole exclusives are bad campaign and then MS went and made an entire publisher exclusive.
 

Infamy v1

Member
"Rivals say he is also skilled at directing negative attention toward competitors—to Microsoft’s benefit".

They are also very sheaky and do this with Sony. When Xbox looked like it could beat PlayStation with the 360 they didn't allow cross play despite Sony wanting to do it. But a generation later when Sony took the same approach MS kept on publicly criticizing Sony despite Sony not criticizing them constantly the previous generation.

The same thing with the whole exclusives are bad campaign and then MS went and made an entire publisher exclusive.

This is an insecurity-filled post with no basis in reality.

Sony never "wanted" cross-platform and there was absolutely zero campaigning for it the way MS did last Gen. Sony simply had cross play on a few titles (so did MS, btw) and Microsoft stated that they did not want XBL to be compromised by PSN, which we all know was barebones as fuck in the early years. Combine that with the big PSN hack and yeah, it's not rocket science. Especially because XBL was the big dog in town back then.

Funnily enough, before you was permabanned on the other site you made a topic about why PSN shouldn't do cross-play due to cheaters outside the networ, because you kept getting beat in CoD. You should know better.

Also, MS never had an "exclusives are bad" campaign. Again, your insecurities are warping reality for you. And this publisher you're talking about had Sony moneyhat two separate games for a year and almost got a third (Starfield), so cry me a river.
 
Last edited:

C2brixx

Member
How did this go from a $68 billion deal to $75 billion?
WSJ likes to use the $75B number because if you multiple the number of outstanding Activision shares by $95 you come out to a little over $74B. Microsoft press release says... "Microsoft will acquire Activision Blizzard for $95.00 per share, in an all-cash transaction valued at $68.7 billion, inclusive of Activision Blizzard’s net cash."
  • Activision Blizzard cash on hand for the quarter ending December 31, 2021 was $9.718B, a 31.06% increase year-over-year.
. Actually there looks to be a 3 Billion breakup fee from MS if this isnt approved. Which shows MS's confidence I guess.
According to the SEC documents there are a lot of stipulations to that breakup fee. Including regulators asking Microsoft agree alter the deal in any way the substantially degrades the asset they are trying to acquire.
Every acquisition thread is already littered with the argument that MS buys the IPs and Sony buys the talent/expertise. As if MS is going to fire all AB devs and just keep the brands…

It’s just people’s bias showing.
I believe the real reason Microsoft is willing to pay so much for Activision/Blizzard isn't solely about video games. They also want the massive engineering and coding talent that Activision has for Microsoft products company wide like Azure, Windows, Bing, etc. This is an opportunity to get big AAA properties, a large amount of legacy IPs, and engineering talent that came be used throughout Microsoft.
 

Zeroing

Banned
Not at all; it all depends on your bias.

According to the posts on this board, Microsoft straight up wasn't competing with Sony. "PlayStation domination!", "Can't beat PlayStation's first party!". Having one player dominate everyone else isn't good for any industry, because it leads to hubris and stagnation. Do you think PlayStation would've re-worked PS Plus if Game Pass hadn't lit a fire under their ass? Microsoft's deep investments here ensure Xbox stays competitive, and PlayStation doesn't get to dominate so freely. Competition, we're told, is a good thing for everyone - and now Microsoft can compete.

Of course, if you're all in on PlayStation, and want that unchecked domination to continue because console wars, Microsoft's acquisitions mean less toys in your toy box, so it's a bad thing. If you're all in on Xbox, Microsoft's acquisitions here are a blast from an orbital death cannon, putting the green team back in the war for another generation.

For me, these acquisitions mean Game Pass gets that much better. With Sony charging AUD$125.00 a game, I can't afford to game so freely on PlayStation anymore. It's just too much money to fork over with every game now trying to nickel and dime. Game Pass, however, offers me an economical alternative, and I want that alternative to succeed as a result.
I am more into Nintendo so I do not care, MIcrosoft, Nintendo and Sony can fight and their fans keep making excuses for what they do!

Still doesn’t benefit us gamers. With so many wrong practices on the gaming industry, nothing gets addressed because everyone is too busy focusing on giving excuses to their favorite brand/publisher/game


You know why I think it’s bad for us gamers? Because I am not a selfish asshole! What’s good for me might not be the same for others!
I would not like to have a group of people to impose on how or what I play and I surely would not to try to do the same to others!
 

Zeroing

Banned
welcome to business. Most of the business are like that.
They dont care about the collateral damage, as long as they make their products desirable (Looking at you Sony, with your spiderman, and Disney with your marvel/star wars).
This is the most tame thing to say! “It is what it is”

They need us, we are their milking sheep! Let’s go back to a time were the gaming industry actually tried to get our money.
The “that company did it first” will not solve anything! Will just keep us busy fighting each other while the gaming industry figures out what’s the new best best thing after MFTs…
 

Deerock71

Member
Nothing to worry about there. MS tried that once before when they first entered the japanese market, and got laughed out of the meeting room :messenger_tears_of_joy:

Ninty's warchest is very very big.
Oh, I know. The recap of that meeting is legendary.

Microsoft:
Hi.

Nintendo:
Will Ferrell Reaction GIF
 

Zeroing

Banned
Gamepass benefits me. Microsoft making acquisitions to put on Gamepass day 1, ALSO benefits me. It's pretty amazing. ☺
What you mean is “I’m selfish, f*ck anyone else!”

there’s a difference between spending 70b to building studios and put their games on gamepass and buying 3rd party devs for 70b and putting them on gamepass.
 

kingfey

Banned
This is the most tame thing to say! “It is what it is”

They need us, we are their milking sheep! Let’s go back to a time were the gaming industry actually tried to get our money.
The “that company did it first” will not solve anything! Will just keep us busy fighting each other while the gaming industry figures out what’s the new best best thing after MFTs…
Everything has limits. Making games is impossible now, without alot of money. You have to sell your soul to these guys, if you want to make your desired games.

Double fine and bungie couldnt keep the lights on their building at the rate they were going, so they sold themselves to Ms/Sony.
 

The_Mike

Member
When I look at AB and ask myself the question - which upcoming game am I literally shaking for right now, I’ve got nothing. What have you got, there may be something I’m forgetting?

If you want to literally shake, then there's a forum for that.

Yikes.

I mean, it's fine you aren't interested in it, everyone has their own opinion.

However there's plenty hyped for call of duty and the next Diablo.
 

Zeroing

Banned
Everything has limits. Making games is impossible now, without alot of money. You have to sell your soul to these guys, if you want to make your desired games.

Double fine and bungie couldnt keep the lights on their building at the rate they were going, so they sold themselves to Ms/Sony.
So we agree that “that game is not worth 70 dollars, will wait when it’s on gamepass” mentality will only make things worse for gaming studios?

Yeah I know it sucks because the studios rarely survive on making making games, that’s the sad part!
 

kingfey

Banned
So we agree that “that game is not worth 70 dollars, will wait when it’s on gamepass” mentality will only make things worse for gaming studios?
You also have to account, the people that wont buy the game, until its $20-$30, because its not worth spending that much money on the game.

Yeah I know it sucks because the studios rarely survive on making making games, that’s the sad part!
Games have other risks, that people here dont really talk about.
If a game gets that yellow mark on Metacritic, its a death sentence for that game. Because of people's obsession with Metacritic.
Then there are cases like bablyon fall, where a game fails to hit certain market. That is alot of losses, which the devs would have to eat. Prime example is avengers.

Subscription services usually help these companies. Since its better to get upfront money, instead of relying on sales like battlefield 2042.

Either sell your games at $60-$70 and bet your chances on those sales, or give your game to a company, which will pay you upfront and recoup most of your budget.
 

Infamy v1

Member
What you mean is “I’m selfish, f*ck anyone else!”

there’s a difference between spending 70b to building studios and put their games on gamepass and buying 3rd party devs for 70b and putting them on gamepass.

Bethesda were in dire straits and have repeatedly said they were looking to be acquired. I don't see this same energy from you lot when Sony moneyhats a dozen AAA games with the sole intention to keep it off of Xbox for not only a year, but now making two years be the norm. Or simply an untold amount of time, which may as well be exclusive in perpetuity. And please miss me with the "bu-but timed exclusives are better!" RotTR would disagree with you and shuts that argument down completely. Not to mention that MS are funding and bankrolling all future content for these studios as opposed to simply paying for the exclusion of other systems/gamers.

ABK was a once in a lifetime deal that fell into their lap, and they need to go a long way into changing the culture there. Developers are actually praising this acquisition and hopeful things will finally change for them. Anyone would have jumped at the opportunity, and according to the memo, at least five other corporations, in fact, did.

The hilarious thing about this is that all the recent acquisition talk thanks to Greg Miller has Sony fans praying and wishing for the acquisition of publishers who are doing more successful than they've ever been, i.e. Capcom, Take-Two and Kadokawa, who literally have no reason to sell at the height of their game aside from money. Even Konami, aside from unused IP, are making absolute bank with their pachinko machines and health care centers. Hypocrisy at its finest. At least with Game Pass users, you can see why they might be "selfish," as opposed to the above.
 
Last edited:

Zeroing

Banned
Bethesda were in dire straits and have repeatedly said they were looking to be acquired. I don't see this same energy from you lot when Sony moneyhats a dozen AAA games with the sole intention to keep it off of Xbox for not only a year, but now making two years be the norm. Or simply an untold amount of time, which may as well be exclusive in perpetuity. And please miss me with the "bu-but timed exclusives are better!" RotTR would disagree with you and shuts that argument down completely. Not to mention that MS are funding and bankrolling all future content for these studios as opposed to simply paying for the exclusion of other systems/gamers.

ABK was a once in a lifetime deal that fell into their lap, and they need to go a long way into changing the culture there. Developers are actually praising this acquisition and hopeful things will finally change for them. Anyone would have jumped at the opportunity, and according to the memo, at least five other corporations, in fact, did.

The hilarious thing about this is that all the recent acquisition talk thanks to Greg Miller has Sony fans praying and wishing for the acquisition of publishers who are doing more successful than they've ever been, i.e. Capcom, Take-Two and Kadokawa, who literally have no reason to sell at the height of their game aside from money. Even Konami, aside from unused IP, are making absolute bank with their pachinko machines and health care centers. Hypocrisy at its finest. At least with Game Pass users, you can see why they might be "selfish," as opposed to the above.
First! You never saw me defending money hats and since people like to use the usual “that company did it too” so did MS but were do this get us? Yeah brands do not care about us! It’s we that care about them and go to extensive levels to defend them!

I like I said before I do not give a f*ck about Sony, Microsoft or Nintendo. I just want the best for us gamers! If people stopped choosing sides gaming would be in the better place right now
 

Ozriel

Member
People have to be really stupid to see this business has a good thing for the gaming industry. The only thing it benefits are fanboys who do not gain anything other than console wars points for games being taken away from competitors.

anyway... kids got to keep making their console wars...

Microsoft announced ages ago that call of duty and other popular titles will remain on PlayStation consoles for the foreseeable future.
What’s being ‘taken away’?

Their games coming to Gamepass day one is a pretty great benefit for many consumers
 

Zeroing

Banned
You also have to account, the people that wont buy the game, until its $20-$30, because its not worth spending that much money on the game.


Games have other risks, that people here dont really talk about.
If a game gets that yellow mark on Metacritic, its a death sentence for that game. Because of people's obsession with Metacritic.
Then there are cases like bablyon fall, where a game fails to hit certain market. That is alot of losses, which the devs would have to eat. Prime example is avengers.

Subscription services usually help these companies. Since its better to get upfront money, instead of relying on sales like battlefield 2042.

Either sell your games at $60-$70 and bet your chances on those sales, or give your game to a company, which will pay you upfront and recoup most of your budget.
Yes it sounds all so nice but we know how most of the gaming industry will opt for the easiest way, a service is no guarantee the devs will survive or that the “quality” ( subjective) will increase.
 

kingfey

Banned
Yes it sounds all so nice but we know how most of the gaming industry will opt for the easiest way, a service is no guarantee the devs will survive
So you want them to die out basically got it.

that the “quality” ( subjective) will increase.
There is this term again.
What is with you guys, and your obsession with quality?

Did you see battlefield 2042, vanguard, and cyberpunk 2077? Because that is what expensive money gives you.
 

Zeroing

Banned
Microsoft announced ages ago that call of duty and other popular titles will remain on PlayStation consoles for the foreseeable future.
What’s being ‘taken away’?

Their games coming to Gamepass day one is a pretty great benefit for many consumers
Companies are not our friends, Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft. All of them will say anything.

Taking away - stop being independent.

I don’t get fans, nobody see a problem with the richest of the big 3 buying 3rd party publishers instead of investing on studios of their own!
Nobody can see what message this sends to Apple, Tencent etc! The message it’s clear, we do not care about how companies operate, make us go into their platform.

Prove yourself you’ll add something to the gaming industry? Nah you can just buy studios!

For me a fan means they want the best for the company but they are also critical!
 

Zeroing

Banned
So you want them to die out basically got it.


There is this term again.
What is with you guys, and your obsession with quality?

Did you see battlefield 2042, vanguard, and cyberpunk 2077? Because that is what expensive money gives you.
Exactly! Quality is not that! We are the ones to blame for it! But we all are busy arguing with each other to demand better practices and games! Like you said metacritic, console wars and so on lead us to here! Homogeneous and bland games! Where rarely we play a good game but we spend more time arguing about other stuff!
 

Ozriel

Member
Companies are not our friends, Sony, Nintendo, Microsoft. All of them will say anything.

Taking away - stop being independent.

I don’t get fans, nobody see a problem with the richest of the big 3 buying 3rd party publishers instead of investing on studios of their own!
Nobody can see what message this sends to Apple, Tencent etc! The message it’s clear, we do not care about how companies operate, make us go into their platform.

Prove yourself you’ll add something to the gaming industry? Nah you can just buy studios!

For me a fan means they want the best for the company but they are also critical!

Microsoft is doing both. They’re purchasing IP, but also investing in their own studios and building new ones. They just set up the Initiative, they’ve upgraded Undead Labs to AAA capability and have funded multiple sub-teams in Rare, Obsidian, Playground etc. the Coalition is reportedly working on a new IP aside from Gears.
not to mention partnerships with IO Interactive and Avalanche on new IP (Contraband, Project Dragon).
 

kingfey

Banned
Exactly! Quality is not that! We are the ones to blame for it! But we all are busy arguing with each other to demand better practices and games! Like you said metacritic, console wars and so on lead us to here! Homogeneous and bland games! Where rarely we play a good game but we spend more time arguing about other stuff!
Like hell we can defeat casuals. They are the ones who buy these stuff in groups. We are suffering, because of them.
 

Dr Bass

Member
Microsoft is doing both. They’re purchasing IP, but also investing in their own studios and building new ones. They just set up the Initiative, they’ve upgraded Undead Labs to AAA capability and have funded multiple sub-teams in Rare, Obsidian, Playground etc. the Coalition is reportedly working on a new IP aside from Gears.
not to mention partnerships with IO Interactive and Avalanche on new IP (Contraband, Project Dragon).
You don’t read the news much, I gather.
 

MScarpa

Member
What you mean is “I’m selfish, f*ck anyone else!”

there’s a difference between spending 70b to building studios and put their games on gamepass and buying 3rd party devs for 70b and putting them on gamepass.
LMFAO. 😂 Are you messing with me? You do realize that GAMEPASS is available for all human beings right? This guy thinks only certain people have access to Gamepass. Life in general must be very difficult for you. There's this old adage you may have heard before "Life isn't fair" Now go cry in the corner with your Playstation, us real gamers will be having fun on ALL PLATFORMS.
 
Last edited:

Dr Bass

Member
You mean the usual that happens on every studio?
No, I definitely don't think most studios have more than half their people leave in a short time. Among apparently other issues that don't seem too dissimilar from Activision/Blizzard, ironically enough.

Point remains. The guy doesn't read too much.

This thread is also hilarious. People saying Gamepass is "amazing" because it allows them to not buy games. Probably the same people that will argue with a straight face that Game Pass is profitable. Even when MS is spending now "76 billion" to acquire one studio, when next year's game is already cancelled. How long do you think it will take MS to make 76 billion in profit on the games division, let alone Game Pass, to recoup all that? Yeah I know they "don't care" because they make plenty of money elsewhere, but again ... this is the definition of MS "subsidizing" gamer habits. And we got people like kingfey kingfey arguing in this very thread that services like GP are now necessary because it's too expensive to make games and companies like MS have to subsidize them, which is the argument I've put forward about the danger GP presents in changing attitudes about buying games. This idea, of course, gets laughed at by a certain group, even though we've already seen this effect on the general software side of life as a result of mobile and are seeing these kinds of opinions already expressed here about games.

We also have that thread talking about XBL going away and potentially being rolled into GP as a new 15 dollar a month baseline. All of a sudden plenty of the "core" group, for lack of a better word, are complaining about price! Saying 15 dollars is just too much and it's going to piss off a lot of gamers. This is still likely well below what it would take to support the service unless they start getting into big subscriber numbers, but they definitely have a ceiling on those subscribers given the number of Xbox gamers out there. But I still thought this was a deal? AND this is the price another certain core group of people try to tout as what the real price is that everyone is paying. "Nobody pays a dollar to get on the service" gets said by some. So if everyone is paying for XBL and GP anyway ... I mean that would be a minimum of about 15 dollars a month (GP is 9.99, XBL can be had for 50-60 a year if you buy annually).

So is the monthly cost too much or is it not? It's still cheaper than buying XBL annually and a couple games a year. What are fans afraid of? I saw plenty of forum users saying they did the $1 conversion (like I did) as well ... again something I am told doesn't really happen. Because if it does happen a lot, or the numbers are given out right after Christmas to include the people who got a system for the holidays and want to try the three month dollar trial or what not ... that means GP isn't pulling in much. But if everyone is paying roughly 15 dollars a month anyway, the new plan is no big deal, so I wouldn't see the need for the hand wringing over the price.

So ... can't have it both ways.

Are people paying monthly and GP is making good money, and the 1 dollar conversion isn't a factor?

Or will 15 dollars a month (minimum) be too much, because the value of GP is largely using Microsoft's onboarding offers that allow you to get all of their software for free, for up to three years, for the price of a bag of candy?

So yeah. A lot of the usual people touting GP in here as usual, saying it's because Microsoft is buying them so much software for free. There is just no way they can keep spending like this unless they truly don't care about their financials. And the people arguing they are "fine" going the way they are have to know deep down they are wrong, because we are getting two conflicting arguments based on what the current news is. Something is going to have to change at some point, unless most people are getting the one dollar ultimate trial and simply staying on. Which I personally doubt, or there wouldn't be rumblings of forcing the minimum expenditure up.

Quick note on my personal stance on the pricing. I actually think moving the service to a 15 dollar a month minimum would be a necessary move to make the service "viable." That would equate to XBL and two games a year for most. I think a lot of people probably spend within that range normally. Then when you factor in things like MTX and DLC and hopefully a higher subscriber count ... you start to get into the kind of scale that could potentially work. But look at the freakout that happened in that thread. Gamers are cheap. I am just not sure a gaming sub, where many people aren't playing games constantly (myself included) just don't see the value in subbing to something like that every month. It's why there is no way in hell I would pay for a monthly gaming service. I just don't play that much and want to actively select what I am buying and spending my time on. It's not like a music streaming service where you can use it hours a day while you work, or a video streaming service where you can use it almost every day to unwind. gaming is dedicated and focused, and I imagine the number of people playing every day, is very small compared to the general audience.

This went way further than I intended. I just can't believe how much emotion gets wrapped up into Game Pass by the Xbox only crowd. It poisons every discussion now, to the point where this crowd jumps into Sony game threads saying how much Sony needs a GP competitor when no one is asking for it or talking about it except for them. It's insanity. Why aren't you Xbox only folks talking about the games you are playing? I'm currently playing Elden Ring. I'd love to talk about that instead.
 

Dr Bass

Member
I agree with that, but I also care about the games and/or features not being moneyhatted by Sony to keep them away from Xbox gamers.
And yet you are thrilled that Sony only gamers won't get StarField.


Just listen to the vitriol dripping from your post on this. I mean good grief, how are you that wrapped up into this stuff? To actually suggest bugs are result of a game being on a Sony platform? And that Sony gamers don't have to worry about those bugs because they won't get any further Bethesda games? But you're worried about the reverse happening. Ok. You have fun with that.
 

Neo_game

Member
7.5billion $ of Bethesda studious was also very big deal but this one is ridiculous. Absolutely unbelievable that this is even happening. Probably the biggest buyout ever to happen ?
 
What you mean is “I’m selfish, f*ck anyone else!”

there’s a difference between spending 70b to building studios and put their games on gamepass and buying 3rd party devs for 70b and putting them on gamepass.

Building studios from the ground up is slow, yes Microsoft should've started building tons of studios 10-15-20 years ago, but they didn't. So now unless they want to basically sacrifice another generation they needed to buy a lot of studios (on top of creating studios and expanding current studios for more long term benefits which they're also currently doing). Plus something that gets lost on people with this viewpoint. If Microsoft just created a bunch of studios and started hiring tons of develops, where do you think they'd come from? There's not a massive surplus of video game devs, they'd be hiring tons of talent from other studios, making those studios worse, which is about the same end result as buying a studio, there'd be less quality video game devs at those other studios and more at Microsoft. The only real massive implications of buying a studio vs creating a similarly sized studio is the name of the studio and the IP that go along with it
 

CatLady

Selfishly plays on Xbox Purr-ies X
And yet you are thrilled that Sony only gamers won't get StarField.


Just listen to the vitriol dripping from your post on this. I mean good grief, how are you that wrapped up into this stuff? To actually suggest bugs are result of a game being on a Sony platform? And that Sony gamers don't have to worry about those bugs because they won't get any further Bethesda games? But you're worried about the reverse happening. Ok. You have fun with that.

I'm thrilled that Xbox gamers get Starfield Day 1 and on Game Pass. If Xbox hadn't bought Bethesda Xbox gamers would have been denied the game for at least 1 year once Sony moneyhatted Starfield in addition to the other Bethesda games they got.

I don't care whether Sony gamers get to play it or not. As an Xbox gamer, I'm just glad it didn't end up the same way Deathloop, Ghostwire, FF7R and a myriad of other games did. I'm also glad I won't have to listen to Sony gamers complain about it being a bugfest and "unplayable" like FO4 and Skyrim.
 

Armorous

Member
Why is this all of a sudden a problem for a company to have a big gaming division... All this is is regulators trying to get their slice of the pie.
 

kingfey

Banned
No, I definitely don't think most studios have more than half their people leave in a short time. Among apparently other issues that don't seem too dissimilar from Activision/Blizzard, ironically enough.
If you are talking about the initiative, no, they didnt lose half of their people. That exaggerating for clickbait, which you seem to fall for.

This thread is also hilarious. People saying Gamepass is "amazing" because it allows them to not buy games. Probably the same people that will argue with a straight face that Game Pass is profitable. Even when MS is spending now "76 billion" to acquire one studio, when next year's game is already cancelled. How long do you think it will take MS to make 76 billion in profit on the games division, let alone Game Pass, to recoup all that? Yeah I know they "don't care" because they make plenty of money elsewhere, but again ... this is the definition of MS "subsidizing" gamer habits. And we got people like kingfey kingfey kingfey kingfey arguing in this very thread that services like GP are now necessary because it's too expensive to make games and companies like MS have to subsidize them, which is the argument I've put forward about the danger GP presents in changing attitudes about buying games. This idea, of course, gets laughed at by a certain group, even though we've already seen this effect on the general software side of life as a result of mobile and are seeing these kinds of opinions already expressed here about games.
Tell us mr SMART man, how many games sell 10M copies a year? Aside of games like fifa, call of duty, and elden ring? None, because its impossible to sell that much number in 1 year. Most games hover around 5m, and below. And that is when they sell on all 3 consoles.

You are also using retail price, instead accounting the platform cut, discounts the game get (Not every game sell $60-$70 all year without a discount), disc fees (Labor, and shipment, plus store cut+ platform royalty). That is what they end up, after their games sell. They dont automatically get $300m-$350m from their 5m copies, which is sold at $60-$70.

Your activision bit is hillarious. MS didnt buy activision for gamepass only. They bought it asset first, which they can sell later. They bought it for their metaverse program, which you apparently have no clue about. And lastly, MS spent that money from their pocket. They can recoup that money in 1 year, from their fiscal quarter profit (Shocker, that you had no clue about this).

Subscription service, whether you like it or not, would be the future. It brings guaranteed money, instead of relying on game sales, which isnt accurate. You can ask Sony 1st party last year, or xbox 1st party this year. Also, not all 1st party games can manage to sell 10m copies in the 1st year. Ratchet, and Miles Morales have yet to hit that bracket.

Point is, Subscription service, bring more money than what game sales actually bring, granted that you reach certain userbase. Once you do that, you dont have to worry about your games flopping on sales. Since you can recoup those money from the subscription service. Something netflix used to make themself bigger.

We also have that thread talking about XBL going away and potentially being rolled into GP as a new 15 dollar a month baseline. All of a sudden plenty of the "core" group, for lack of a better word, are complaining about price! Saying 15 dollars is just too much and it's going to piss off a lot of gamers. This is still likely well below what it would take to support the service unless they start getting into big subscriber numbers, but they definitely have a ceiling on those subscribers given the number of Xbox gamers out there. But I still thought this was a deal? AND this is the price another certain core group of people try to tout as what the real price is that everyone is paying. "Nobody pays a dollar to get on the service" gets said by some. So if everyone is paying for XBL and GP anyway ... I mean that would be a minimum of about 15 dollars a month (GP is 9.99, XBL can be had for 50-60 a year if you buy annually).
Because that fucking subscription is a robbery. People shouldnt be forced to be pay for online subscription. Charging more, is pissing off people. Unless you are a corporate bootlicker, who likes to pay more for these online services. No way, you should accept that shit. Fuck MS and Sony for charging people online in the 1st place.

So is the monthly cost too much or is it not? It's still cheaper than buying XBL annually and a couple games a year. What are fans afraid of?
They fucking hate paying too much for a shit online service, which they shouldnt have to pay in the 1st place. You are fucking dense,

I saw plenty of forum users saying they did the $1 conversion (like I did) as well ... again something I am told doesn't really happen. Because if it does happen a lot, or the numbers are given out right after Christmas to include the people who got a system for the holidays and want to try the three month dollar trial or what not ... that means GP isn't pulling in much. But if everyone is paying roughly 15 dollars a month anyway, the new plan is no big deal, so I wouldn't see the need for the hand wringing over the price.
Gee, no wonder you are pissed off about gamepass. So this was your plan to shit on gamepass.
Well MR smart pants, You pay $180 upfront for gamepass, if you have no clue how that conversion works. By the looks of it, you really have no clue how gamepass works in the 1st place. And that 1$ you and your buddy keeps bringing, is only for new people. By then you will be charged $15 a month. You would have known this, if you were an actual gamepass user.

So ... can't have it both ways.

Are people paying monthly and GP is making good money, and the 1 dollar conversion isn't a factor?
Do you even have gamepass? Because the more you type this, the more clueless you are.
Let me educate you on this part.
The 3 year gamepass conversion requires you to buy 3 years of xbox live gold. That is $180 upfront. Then you will need an account, that never had a gamepass for 4 month, or the account is new. You load those gold card first, and you find the 1$ month deal, and activate gamepass. If you dont follow these specific task, you will not get 3 year gamepass. You will end up with 1 year gamepass. Because that is how gamepass works.
It doesnt work on regular gamepass users. It will just charge you the normal conversion rate. 1 year of xbox live gold is 4 month of gamepass.

So yeah. A lot of the usual people touting GP in here as usual, saying it's because Microsoft is buying them so much software for free. There is just no way they can keep spending like this unless they truly don't care about their financials. And the people arguing they are "fine" going the way they are have to know deep down they are wrong, because we are getting two conflicting arguments based on what the current news is. Something is going to have to change at some point, unless most people are getting the one dollar ultimate trial and simply staying on. Which I personally doubt, or there wouldn't be rumblings of forcing the minimum expenditure up.
Lets pretend MS doesnt really make money from all the dlc in the service, all the mtx in the service. and worst, lets pretend that you cant buy games from gamepass at all.
I feel sorry for you. I have never seen a person like you,

Quick note on my personal stance on the pricing. I actually think moving the service to a 15 dollar a month minimum would be a necessary move to make the service "viable." That would equate to XBL and two games a year for most. I think a lot of people probably spend within that range normally. Then when you factor in things like MTX and DLC and hopefully a higher subscriber count ... you start to get into the kind of scale that could potentially work.
You perfectly described what gamepass ultimate is.

But look at the freakout that happened in that thread. Gamers are cheap. I am just not sure a gaming sub, where many people aren't playing games constantly (myself included) just don't see the value in subbing to something like that every month. It's why there is no way in hell I would pay for a monthly gaming service. I just don't play that much and want to actively select what I am buying and spending my time on. It's not like a music streaming service where you can use it hours a day while you work, or a video streaming service where you can use it almost every day to unwind. gaming is dedicated and focused, and I imagine the number of people playing every day, is very small compared to the general audience.
You were so close to understanding it. and now you just did 180 degree completely.

I have a question, do you even have gamepass?

This went way further than I intended. I just can't believe how much emotion gets wrapped up into Game Pass by the Xbox only crowd. It poisons every discussion now, to the point where this crowd jumps into Sony game threads saying how much Sony needs a GP competitor when no one is asking for it or talking about it except for them. It's insanity. Why aren't you Xbox only folks talking about the games you are playing? I'm currently playing Elden Ring. I'd love to talk about that instead.
All you did was write your bullshit, like you do every day.
I feel like I am wasting my replying to you.
 
Last edited:

phil_t98

Gold Member
If you are talking about the initiative, no, they didnt lose half of their people. That exaggerating for clickbait, which you seem to fall for.


Tell us mr SMART man, how many games sell 10M copies a year? Aside of games like fifa, call of duty, and elden ring? None, because its impossible to sell that much number in 1 year. Most games hover around 5m, and below. And that is when they sell on all 3 consoles.

You are also using retail price, instead accounting the platform cut, discounts the game get (Not every game sell $60-$70 all year without a discount), disc fees (Labor, and shipment, plus store cut+ platform royalty). That is what they end up, after their games sell. They dont automatically get $300m-$350m from their 5m copies, which is sold at $60-$70.

Your activision bit is hillarious. MS didnt buy activision for gamepass only. They bought it asset first, which they can sell later. They bought it for their metaverse program, which you apparently have no clue about. And lastly, MS spent that money from their pocket. They can recoup that money in 1 year, from their fiscal quarter profit (Shocker, that you had no clue about this).

Subscription service, whether you like it or not, would be the future. It brings guaranteed money, instead of relying on game sales, which isnt accurate. You can ask Sony 1st party last year, or xbox 1st party this year. Also, not all 1st party games can manage to sell 10m copies in the 1st year. Ratchet, and Miles Morales have yet to hit that bracket.

Point is, Subscription service, bring more money than what game sales actually bring, granted that you reach certain userbase. Once you do that, you dont have to worry about your games flopping on sales. Since you can recoup those money from the subscription service. Something netflix used to make themself bigger.


Because that fucking subscription is a robbery. People shouldnt be forced to be pay for online subscription. Charging more, is pissing off people. Unless you are a corporate bootlicker, who likes to pay more for these online services. No way, you should accept that shit. Fuck MS and Sony for charging people online in the 1st place.


They fucking hate paying too much for a shit online service, which they shouldnt have to pay in the 1st place. You are fucking dense,


Gee, no wonder you are pissed off about gamepass. So this was your plan to shit on gamepass.
Well MR smart pants, You pay $180 upfront for gamepass, if you have no clue how that conversion works. By the looks of it, you really have no clue how gamepass works in the 1st place. And that 1$ you and your buddy keeps bringing, is only for new people. By then you will be charged $15 a month. You would have known this, if you were an actual gamepass user.


Do you even have gamepass? Because the more you type this, the more clueless you are.
Let me educate you on this part.
The 3 year gamepass conversion requires you to buy 3 years of xbox live gold. That is $180 upfront. Then you will need an account, that never had a gamepass for 4 month, or the account is new. You load those gold card first, and you find the 1$ month deal, and activate gamepass. If you dont follow these specific task, you will not get 3 year gamepass. You will end up with 1 year gamepass. Because that is how gamepass works.
It doesnt work on regular gamepass users. It will just charge you the normal conversion rate. 1 year of xbox live gold is 4 month of gamepass.


Lets pretend MS doesnt really make money from all the dlc in the service, all the mtx in the service. and worst, lets pretend that they cant buy games from gamepass at all.
I feel sorry for you. I have never seen a person like you,


You perfectly described what gamepass ultimate is.


You were so close to understanding it. and now you just did 180 degree completely.

I have a question, do you even have gamepass?


All you did was write your bullshit, like you do every day.
I feel like I am wasting my replying to you.


the one thing that people seem top forget when they say about recouping money back, they never mention the games are still for sale to. that helps with the profitability. look at Forza horizon 5 and how many players it had before the official release, millions were playing the ultimate edition which had to be bough or the add on had to be bought to get early access. people act like the games go on gamer pass and that's the only way to play them
 
Top Bottom