Support NeoGAF

[Warablo]

I don't really care about CoD but whatever gives Sony the most pressure I am all for. They are the best when under pressure.

 

[IFireflyl]

A lot of big Sony games that playstation fans love exist because studios were acquired. It happens. Are you saying Sony should go back and make a big chunk of its studios third party now because they were originally bought once upon a time? Does it really even matter if a dev "has a history" with Sony or Microsoft? They're all games that could have potentially come to other systems if they weren't bought and funded by Sony or Microsoft. That's such a weak argument that people make. I don't WANT Destiny or Doom to be exclusive to any console, but if it happens it happens. And it happens. So I just gotta put on my big boy pants buy the game wherever I have to and move forward with life.

And things are becoming kind of stagnant in the industry so yeah, I'm interested to see what could result from something of this magnitude.

You seem to be under the impression that everyone who is against this acquisition would change their minds if it was Sony that was doing the acquisition. People like Topher and myself have made it very clear that this isn't a Microsoft vs. Sony argument that we're making. We are against consolidation of large publishers by mega corporations. Period. If Microsoft or Sony want to acquire a small start-up and make that studio grow under its leadership, that's fine by me. (Note: I am not speaking for Topher on this point as this is just my own opinion.) The issue is the market leaders buying up traditionally multi-platform publishers in order to foreclose and make these titles, in full or in part, exclusive to their console. That's not okay, and nobody should feel good about that.

 

[Bernardougf]

And every 10 pages a blue fanboy appears to bitch/moan and try to start shit.

Warriors on all sides are pathetic incels, let's be real.

Hey when the boot fits the boot fits

 

[Edmund]

Someone needs to do a tier list for the Xbox fans in gaf rating them from sane all the way to complete bonkers.

https://tiermaker.com/

 

[Yoboman]

A lot of big Sony games that playstation fans love exist because studios were acquired. It happens. Are you saying Sony should go back and make a big chunk of its studios third party now because they were originally bought once upon a time? Does it really even matter if a dev "has a history" with Sony or Microsoft? They're all games that could have potentially come to other systems if they weren't bought and funded by Sony or Microsoft. That's such a weak argument that people make. I don't WANT Destiny or Doom to be exclusive to any console, but if it happens it happens. And it happens. So I just gotta put on my big boy pants buy the game wherever I have to and move forward with life.

And things are becoming kind of stagnant in the industry so yeah, I'm interested to see what could result from something of this magnitude.

Let's give examples of games that Sony have bought and made exclusive?

 

[Clintizzle]

Someone needs to do a tier list for the Xbox fans in gaf rating them from sane all the way to complete bonkers.

http://[URL]https://tiermaker.com/

[/URL]

I'm all for it as long as I'm the cutest Xbox fan.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Let's give examples of games that Sony have bought and made exclusive?

I've seen some use Spiderman. But I don't believe that works here.

 

[3liteDragon]

I've seen some use Spiderman. But I don't believe that works here.

It doesn't because Marvel owns the IP, so Microsoft can get a license from them if they wanna make a Spider-Man for their platform, nothing was taken away there. It's a dumb excuse that doesn't make any sense, not even remotely the same thing as Bethesda & Starfield.

 

[splattered]

You seem to be under the impression that everyone who is against this acquisition would change their minds if it was Sony that was doing the acquisition. People like Topher and myself have made it very clear that this isn't a Microsoft vs. Sony argument that we're making. We are against consolidation of large publishers by mega corporations. Period. If Microsoft or Sony want to acquire a small start-up and make that studio grow under its leadership, that's fine by me. (Note: I am not speaking for Topher on this point as this is just my own opinion.) The issue is the market leaders buying up traditionally multi-platform publishers in order to foreclose and make these titles, in full or in part, exclusive to their console. That's not okay, and nobody should feel good about that.

Yup and i respect that point of view 1000% more than "But i hate Microsoft because i like Playstation, so i don't want this to pass"

Not wanting consolidation by a mega corp is a fair opinion to have, i just know that i have zero control over this situation and if it passes regulators then it passes and no amount of complaining by people on the internet is going to change that.

If it DOES pass, then i'll look forward to seeing what if anything changes due to the acquisition.

And if it doesnt pass, then we move on to the next drama to focus on haha

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

Let's give examples of games that Sony have bought and made exclusive?

*crickets*

 

[Topher]

Yup and i respect that point of view 1000% more than "But i hate Microsoft because i like Playstation, so i don't want this to pass"

Not wanting consolidation by a mega corp is a fair opinion to have, i just know that i have zero control over this situation and if it passes regulators then it passes and no amount of complaining by people on the internet is going to change that.

If it DOES pass, then i'll look forward to seeing what if anything changes due to the acquisition.

And if it doesnt pass, then we move on to the next drama to focus on haha

There is certainly no reason to cry about it if it goes through. Just hope for the best at that point.

It doesn't because Marvel owns the IP, so Microsoft can get a license from them if they wanna make a Spider-Man for their platform, nothing was taken away there. It's a dumb excuse that doesn't make any sense, not even remotely the same thing as Bethesda & Starfield.

Yep. Same situation if Xbox makes Indiana Jones Xbox exclusive.

 

[TheGodfather07]

Let's give examples of games that Sony have bought and made exclusive?

They will never reply when you ask for examples because there aren't any.

 

[Goalus]

They will never reply when you ask for examples because there aren't any.

The concept of Wipeout was first discussed during a pub conversation, when a Psygnosis staff member, Jim Bowers, envisioned creating a futuristic racing game which featured anti-gravity ships.[1] Some elements of the game were inspired by Matrix Marauders, an Amiga game released by the Liverpudlian studio in 1990. A beta version of Wipeout appeared in the cult film Hackers, in which the game is played by the protagonists in a nightclub. The game's appearance in the film led to Sony purchasing the studio in the months after its release.

Wipeout was in development as a multi-platform title. Then Sony took it away.

Edit:
It wasn't taken away.
Psygnosis, however, was.

 

[Varteras]

You seem to be under the impression that everyone who is against this acquisition would change their minds if it was Sony that was doing the acquisition. People like Topher and myself have made it very clear that this isn't a Microsoft vs. Sony argument that we're making. We are against consolidation of large publishers by mega corporations. Period. If Microsoft or Sony want to acquire a small start-up and make that studio grow under its leadership, that's fine by me. (Note: I am not speaking for Topher on this point as this is just my own opinion.) The issue is the market leaders buying up traditionally multi-platform publishers in order to foreclose and make these titles, in full or in part, exclusive to their console. That's not okay, and nobody should feel good about that.

I definitely share this sentiment. Though I have exceptions when it comes to big, multiplatform companies. For starters, if the company being bought is facing serious financial hardships and would possibly have to do mass layoffs, close studios, or fold entirely. That was the situation with Zenimax as I understood it, which Jeff Grubb had also alluded to by pointing out the consistently lacking commercial performance of most of their games. A situation like that I'm fine with. A $7 billion price tag was well within the financial ability of any of the other major companies but no one did what needed to be done to grab them. Microsoft did.

I'm also fine with any major company being purchased by a first-party when their games just haven't sold well elsewhere and it can be shown that a significant majority of the customers exist on that platform. But this needs to be something that is the case over a long period of time, that company has frequently opted to restrict games to that platform, and it can be shown that there is no real health for that company to be found on other platforms.

The above two scenarios are rather uncommon, if not rare. With that in mind, I did not care for Sony's acquisition of Bungie. Bungie was a huge independent studio running a multiplatform franchise for approaching a decade. Now, it will continue to operate as it has, but I don't trust that to remain that way forever. Bungie was not in financial danger nor did they have a long running relationship with Sony that saw most or all of its customers exist on PlayStation. I understand why the deal happened, but I nonetheless was not thrilled about it.

ABK is just on such a whole other level from anything we've ever seen in this industry. It has such potentially massive and disruptive consequences across the whole of gaming. ABK was not even remotely in financial danger. Their games are either everywhere or incredibly impactful for the platforms they exist on. The whole situation was born out of a desire to dodge the consequences of actions or failures over many years in one shot by two parties. It is by far the greatest sudden consolidation of the industry and something that makes me nervous about its future.

 

[Topher]

The concept of Wipeout was first discussed during a pub conversation, when a Psygnosis staff member, Jim Bowers, envisioned creating a futuristic racing game which featured anti-gravity ships.[1] Some elements of the game were inspired by Matrix Marauders, an Amiga game released by the Liverpudlian studio in 1990. A beta version of Wipeout appeared in the cult film Hackers, in which the game is played by the protagonists in a nightclub. The game's appearance in the film led to Sony purchasing the studio in the months after its release.

Wipeout was in development as a multi-platform title. Then Sony took it away.

Edit:
It wasn't taken away.
Psygnosis, however, was.

How can that be? Sony acquired Psynosis in 1993. The movie Hackers wasn't released until 1995.

"Studio Liverpool began life as Psygnosis in 1984, swiftly building up a reputation for developing innovative, cutting-edge games for the leading game platforms. After becoming part of Sony Computer Entertainment (SCE) in 1993, Studio Liverpool was intrinsically linked with the success of PlayStation®, creating the original "Wipeout" in 1995, followed closely by "Colony Wars" in 1996. The studio has since developed launch titles for every PlayStation format that has been released."

SCE Worldwide Studios - SCE Studio Liverpool

Hackers (1995) ⭐ 6.2 | Crime, Drama, Romance

1h 45m | PG-13

www.imdb.com

 

[Clintizzle]

Does the CMA know that Knack was never released on Xbox?

 

[Mr Moose]

The concept of Wipeout was first discussed during a pub conversation, when a Psygnosis staff member, Jim Bowers, envisioned creating a futuristic racing game which featured anti-gravity ships.[1] Some elements of the game were inspired by Matrix Marauders, an Amiga game released by the Liverpudlian studio in 1990. A beta version of Wipeout appeared in the cult film Hackers, in which the game is played by the protagonists in a nightclub. The game's appearance in the film led to Sony purchasing the studio in the months after its release.

Wipeout was in development as a multi-platform title. Then Sony took it away.

Edit:
It wasn't taken away.
Psygnosis, however, was.

Confusing Wipeout with Halo and Sony with MicroSoft.

 

[Brucey]

MS make some dumb decisions and some evil decisions but they aren't so stupidly evil to give up 100's of millions of dollars in yearly revenue from playstation owners just out of spite.

The Xbox business doesn't operate under the normal rules of a business. It has effectively unlimited cash generated by the other Microsoft divisions to subsidize Xbox operations. That's not the case with Nintendo or Sony. Microsoft want to "push" people into Gamepass and they will willingly spend billions to do so. At least until Nadella blows the final whistle.

 

[Yoboman]

The concept of Wipeout was first discussed during a pub conversation, when a Psygnosis staff member, Jim Bowers, envisioned creating a futuristic racing game which featured anti-gravity ships.[1] Some elements of the game were inspired by Matrix Marauders, an Amiga game released by the Liverpudlian studio in 1990. A beta version of Wipeout appeared in the cult film Hackers, in which the game is played by the protagonists in a nightclub. The game's appearance in the film led to Sony purchasing the studio in the months after its release.

Wipeout was in development as a multi-platform title. Then Sony took it away.

Edit:
It wasn't taken away.
Psygnosis, however, was.

Psygnosis published over 75 multiplatform games after being purchased by Sony and before closing. How were they taken away?

 

[mansoor1980]

a lot of psygnosis games were multiplatform even after sony bought them

 

[Topher]

Does the CMA know that Knack was never released on Xbox?

 

[Wulfer]

The concept of Wipeout was first discussed during a pub conversation, when a Psygnosis staff member, Jim Bowers, envisioned creating a futuristic racing game which featured anti-gravity ships.[1] Some elements of the game were inspired by Matrix Marauders, an Amiga game released by the Liverpudlian studio in 1990. A beta version of Wipeout appeared in the cult film Hackers, in which the game is played by the protagonists in a nightclub. The game's appearance in the film led to Sony purchasing the studio in the months after its release.

Wipeout was in development as a multi-platform title. Then Sony took it away.

Edit:
It wasn't taken away.
Psygnosis, however, was.

It was taken away, Wipeout originally appeared on the Saturn in 1996 after releasing on Playstation in 1995! Destruction Derby 2 was PS exclusives and never released on Saturn as far as I know. After Sony BOUGHT Psygnosis Sony locked Wipeout as a Playstation only Exclusive. Those are the facts on Wipeout and I should know it was one of my favorite games to play back then. FYI Wipeout XL never made it to the States on Saturn because Sony locked Sega out of the title!

 

[Topher]

It was taken away, Wipeout originally appeared on the Saturn in 1996 after releasing on Playstation in 1995! Destruction Derby and DD2 were PS exclusives and never released on Saturn as far as I know. After Sony BOUGHT Psygnosis Sony locked Wipeout as a Playstation only Exclusive. Those are the facts on Wipeout and I should know it was one of my favorite games to play back then.

How did Wipeout "originally" appear on the Saturn in 1996 after releasing on PS in 1995? As far as Wipeout being locked as a PS exclusive.....

Also....

 

[sainraja]

Toys for Bob and Vicarious Visions have been turned into support studios... you're never going to get new games in those series under Activision anyway. Again, people complaining about nothing. Microsoft can afford to reform and hire for COD teams as necessary and let studios that make stuff like Spyro and Tony Hawk go back to actually making the games they want to.

A lot of big Sony games that playstation fans love exist because studios were acquired. It happens. Are you saying Sony should go back and make a big chunk of its studios third party now because they were originally bought once upon a time? Does it really even matter if a dev "has a history" with Sony or Microsoft? They're all games that could have potentially come to other systems if they weren't bought and funded by Sony or Microsoft. That's such a weak argument that people make. I don't WANT Destiny or Doom to be exclusive to any console, but if it happens it happens. And it happens. So I just gotta put on my big boy pants buy the game wherever I have to and move forward with life.

And things are becoming kind of stagnant in the industry so yeah, I'm interested to see what could result from something of this magnitude.

1. You seem more invested in seeing this happen than not. So it is a bit hard to take you seriously when you say "if it happens, it happens," where the implication is that it is just the nature of the business. Nah, one company can clearly outspend the other. If it doesn't happen, it doesn't happen I guess lol. That doesn't mean much.
--
2. I'm not sure what you expect to see changing when the Microsoft money you say will help Activision change hasn't brought any fruits to MS so far—with their own studios—the very reason this acquisition is even being made. How is this lost on you?

This is simply Microsoft trying to aggressively push Game Pass, and they have the means to outspend their competitors, so when I see them making statements like "...COD will be on PS as long as PS exists..." I just have to laugh because that could mean two things and one of them is, well, if we can eliminate PS by outspending them and forcing them into a corner, then no more PS to put COD on.

I am not saying that is what is going to happen, but my point is simply that this is being done to feed the Game Pass machine. If you like Xbox and love Game Pass, I don't fault you for wanting this to close in favor of MS but that doesn't mean it is a good thing for Activision and the industry in the long term. I am also not blind to the fact that perhaps some of us are not seeing it right now, but it could also bring forward something good.

 

[DarkMage619]

a lot of psygnosis games were multiplatform even after sony bought them

Just like MS. This whole argument about MS taking away games is silly. Every game that was announced for non-Xbox platforms were released after a studio was acquired by MS even to their detriment. Xbox also has more IP they own on non-Xbox platforms than any other platform holder as well. They are also they only platform holder to release all their titles on PC day and date so you aren't even required to own an Xbox to play their games. Pretty sure the biggest game Activision makes will continue to be released on the same platforms and even some new ones after this acquisition.

 

[bitbydeath]

Imagine arguing about a studio that no longer exists, that had been acquired 30 years ago when PlayStation was just beginning.

 

[mansoor1980]

Just like MS. This whole argument about MS taking away games is silly. Every game that was announced for non-Xbox platforms were released after a studio was acquired by MS even to their detriment. Xbox also has more IP they own on non-Xbox platforms than any other platform holder as well. They are also they only platform holder to release all their titles on PC day and date so you aren't even required to own an Xbox to play their games. Pretty sure the biggest game Activision makes will continue to be released on the same platforms and even some new ones after this acquisition.

 

[TheGodfather07]

Just like MS. This whole argument about MS taking away games is silly. Every game that was announced for non-Xbox platforms were released after a studio was acquired by MS even to their detriment. Xbox also has more IP they own on non-Xbox platforms than any other platform holder as well. They are also they only platform holder to release all their titles on PC day and date so you aren't even required to own an Xbox to play their games. Pretty sure the biggest game Activision makes will continue to be released on the same platforms and even some new ones after this acquisition.

its not an argument. its a fact. something you cant comprehend.

 

[Alesimage]

I'm just so happy Sony can no longer purchase exclusivity to huge aaa games like deathloop and ghostwire in regards to Bethesda. Tried to do it with starfield and MS came out swinging. Kinda feels good not gonna lie. After the purchase of Activision, no more call is duty exclusive content.

 

[Topher]

I'm just so happy Sony can no longer purchase exclusivity to huge aaa games like deathloop and ghostwire.

They can't?

 

[TheGodfather07]

I'm just so happy Sony can no longer purchase exclusivity to huge aaa games like deathloop and ghostwire. Tried to do it with starfield and MS came out swinging. Kinda feels good not gonna lie.

huge? both games were total flops. silent hill and final fantasy are big. sony have exclusivity for both.

 

[Alesimage]

They can't?

Edited post.

 

[DForce]

When people bring up Psygnosis.... JFC. lol

 

[ManaByte]

What would happen if tomorrow Activision announced COD was going fully F2P? No longer $70 a year on any platform.

 

[Topher]

When people bring up Psygnosis.... JFC. lol

Well if they are going to use Psygnosis as their "gotcha" then they should at least double check their facts, but yeah......not much of a "gotcha".

What would happen if tomorrow Activision announced COD was going fully F2P? No longer $70 a year on any platform.

I go outside and watch the pigs

 

[sainraja]

You seem to be under the impression that everyone who is against this acquisition would change their minds if it was Sony that was doing the acquisition. People like Topher and myself have made it very clear that this isn't a Microsoft vs. Sony argument that we're making. We are against consolidation of large publishers by mega corporations. Period. If Microsoft or Sony want to acquire a small start-up and make that studio grow under its leadership, that's fine by me. (Note: I am not speaking for Topher on this point as this is just my own opinion.) The issue is the market leaders buying up traditionally multi-platform publishers in order to foreclose and make these titles, in full or in part, exclusive to their console. That's not okay, and nobody should feel good about that.

When you can present opposing viewpoints as "Sony vs. Microsoft," it is simpler to downplay those viewpoints than your own.

 

[Wulfer]

How did Wipeout "originally" appear on the Saturn in 1996 after releasing on PS in 1995? As far as Wipeout being locked as a PS exclusive.....

Also....

Wipeout XL was locked as States Exclusive to PS consoles. Go back and read what I typed. Destruction Derby 2 was also, a PS exclusive. Wipeout XL and DD2 were taken away get it? (Atleast in the States)

 

[Topher]

Wipeout XL was locked as States Exclusive to PS consoles. Go back and read what I typed. Destruction Derby 2 was also, a PS exclusive. Wipeout XL and DD2 were taken away get it? (Atleast in the States)

I was correcting your statement.

"Destruction Derby and DD2 were PS exclusives and never released on Saturn as far as I know. After Sony BOUGHT Psygnosis Sony locked Wipeout as a Playstation only Exclusive. "

I didn't say anything about Wipeout XL or DD2.

 

[Iced Arcade]

What would happen if tomorrow Activision announced COD was going fully F2P? No longer $70 a year on any platform.

Nothing.... jim still wouldn't be happy

I don't think there is anything anyone can do or say that would make Jim support this acquisition.

Losing the marketing deal for COD alone would be a gut punch to any company let alone loss of the massive annual income for such a title. Casuals fork over cash hand over fist for COD.

 

[gothmog]

What would happen if tomorrow Activision announced COD was going fully F2P? No longer $70 a year on any platform.

They did. It's called warzone.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Let's give examples of games that Sony have bought and made exclusive?

I've seen some use Spiderman. But I don't believe that works here.

Spider-Man is a terrible example because the purchase of Insomniac had nothing to do with the Spider-Man license which isn't owned or even licensed by Insomniac. And on top of that Microsoft could have had a shot at the license and turned it down.

They probably at the time assumed that Sony also would turn it down and it would go to a 3rd party who would make it on Xbox. They didn't realize at the time that it would lead to further licensing with Wolverine which will likely turn into further licensing with X-Men if the game is successful.

Sony's pattern is largely working with a company almost as if they date them and then get married. The only times they've purchased companies they didn't have a long-standing relationship with, the company either didn't have IP or they didn't make the IP exclusive.

We're in a new phase of the gaming industry where as a result of Microsoft's moves, Sony may need to get more aggressive with their M&A, but we've yet to see it.

 

[gothmog]

Spider-Man is a terrible example because the purchase of Insomniac had nothing to do with the Spider-Man license which isn't owned or even licensed by Insomniac. And on top of that Microsoft could have had a shot at the license and turned it down.

They probably at the time assumed that Sony also would turn it down and it would go to a 3rd party who would make it on Xbox. They didn't realize at the time that it would lead to further licensing with Wolverine which will likely turn into further licensing with X-Men if the game is successful.

Sony's pattern is largely working with a company almost as if they date them and then get married. The only times they've purchased companies they didn't have a long-standing relationship with, the company either didn't have IP or they didn't make the IP exclusive.

We're in a new phase of the gaming industry where as a result of Microsoft's moves, Sony may need to get more aggressive with their M&A, but we've yet to see it.

I don't think Sony needs to get more aggressive. This acquisition game will guarantee an eventual loss as Microsoft has the bigger warchest.

100 percent agreed on everything else. The dating analogy is perfect.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I don't think Sony needs to get more aggressive. This acquisition game will guarantee an eventual loss as Microsoft has the bigger warchest.

100 percent agreed on everything else. The dating analogy is perfect.

I don't think it comes down to warchest.

You look for example at Zenimax and CDPR. Ultimately Zenimax would have been more expensive, but CDPR would be the better buy.

You look at Insomniac vs Zenimax, and you could probably argue that Insomniac will pull in more money over the next 10 years than Zenimax will and Insomniac cost 20x less.

I think making the right move is more important than making the bigger move.

Buying FromSoftware COULD potentially generate more revenue than Zenimax as well at a fraction of the price.

Buying T2 could potentially generate more revenue than Activision at a fraction of the price. It's probably the biggest company I'd buy if I was running SIE. Honestly, to me, it's a no-brainer and not even just for GTA and Red Dead or even for Zynga, but for 2K Sports.

Funding original IP with talented studios even startup studios could have much more significant ramifications. Bungie was not a big studio when Microsoft bought them.

I think investments in Japanese studios could pay dividends down the road.

 

[SneakersSO]

What would happen if tomorrow Activision announced COD was going fully F2P? No longer $70 a year on any platform.

There would be a strong hit to stock price almost immediately. The revenue from launch window sales is a massive revenue driver for them, and its the primary reason (besides buying King) that has led ATVI to growing to the size they are today

They invested heavily into releasing yearly for that yearly revenue spike. I think folks on forums have 0 idea just how much full game sales can make a pub.

 

[gothmog]

I don't think it comes down to warchest.

You look for example at Zenimax and CDPR. Ultimately Zenimax would have been more expensive, but CDPR would be the better buy.

You look at Insomniac vs Zenimax, and you could probably argue that Insomniac will pull in more money over the next 10 years than Zenimax will and Insomniac cost 20x less.

I think making the right move is more important than making the bigger move.

Buying FromSoftware COULD potentially generate more revenue than Zenimax as well at a fraction of the price.

Buying T2 could potentially generate more revenue than Activision at a fraction of the price. It's probably the biggest company I'd buy if I was running SIE. Honestly, to me, it's a no-brainer and not even just for GTA and Red Dead or even for Zynga, but for 2K Sports.

Funding original IP with talented studios even startup studios could have much more significant ramifications. Bungie was not a big studio when Microsoft bought them.

I think investments in Japanese studios could pay dividends down the road.

I would love to see them grow like this. I meant just a pure war of acquisition that would not work. Sony doing it organically has worked well for them so this would work.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I would love to see them grow like this. I meant just a pure war of acquisition. Sony doing it organically has worked well for them so this would work.

Sometimes organic growth works and sometimes vertical and horizontal growth is needed. Just because organic growth works doesn't mean that is all that can/will work.

Before Sony bought Naughty Dog, they really hadn't been in the practice of buying many studios at all. That decision changed Sony forever.

 

[Sanepar]

I don't think it comes down to warchest.

You look for example at Zenimax and CDPR. Ultimately Zenimax would have been more expensive, but CDPR would be the better buy.

You look at Insomniac vs Zenimax, and you could probably argue that Insomniac will pull in more money over the next 10 years than Zenimax will and Insomniac cost 20x less.

I think making the right move is more important than making the bigger move.

Buying FromSoftware COULD potentially generate more revenue than Zenimax as well at a fraction of the price.

Buying T2 could potentially generate more revenue than Activision at a fraction of the price. It's probably the biggest company I'd buy if I was running SIE. Honestly, to me, it's a no-brainer and not even just for GTA and Red Dead or even for Zynga, but for 2K Sports.

Funding original IP with talented studios even startup studios could have much more significant ramifications. Bungie was not a big studio when Microsoft bought them.

I think investments in Japanese studios could pay dividends down the road.

There is a lot of great cheap studios out there:

Remedy
Larian
From Software
Kojima
IO Interactive

Small pub
Cdpr 2bn
Capcom 7.2bn

Biggest bet
T2

 

[drganon]

Well to be fair, some of you have been saying extremely retarded stuff, don't know the process, have spent the past month circle jerking each other, and pretending this thread is your own personal ego stroking playpen.

With all the crying you lot have been doing lately. Surely you're running low on tears by now.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

There is a lot of great cheap studios out there:

Remedy
Larian
From Software
Kojima
IO Interactive

Small pub
Cdpr 2bn
Capcom 7.2bn

Biggest bet
T2

Kojima doesn't want to sell, FromSoftware is VERY risky, Larian, Remedy, and IO are kind of suspect buys to be honest.

CDPR and Capcom are the best smaller purchases money can buy.

T2 is the biggest bet but also the best bet. Zynga, Rockstar, and 2K Sports... If you never bought another company again, you'd be fine.

CDPR makes a ton of sense, though finding the right value for the company would be difficult, especially after an exodus of talent.

Capcom is the best studio in Japan right now. Street Fighter is as popular as its ever been and so is Resident Evil and Monster Hunter. I think Mega Man is ripe for a reboot, one that I think Insomnaic would knock out of the park. Capcom checks off A LOT of boxes and is probably the best buy from a cost-variety perspective. If you're Sony, partnering them up with Bluepoint and Insomniac makes a lot of sense. Makes sense for PSVR too.

 

[01011001]

huge? both games were total flops. silent hill and final fantasy are big. sony have exclusivity for both.

FF is arguably a big game, SH is absolutely not one.

Final Fantasy XV did sell about 10 million units... I mean 10 million isn't awful by any means, but it's nothing compared to big hits like Elden Ring which easily doubled that in 12 months.

but Silent Hill? the whole franchise didn't even sell 10 million units... not even 9 million. according to Konami the franchise sold 8.8 million units. thats from SH1 all the way back on PS1, to Downpour and the HD collection.
a single Resident Evil title these days sells more copies than the whole SH franchise. Resident Evil 6 sold more units than all of Silent Hill combined