• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and Xbox head Phil Spencer discuss further acquisitions

SNG32

Member
Jul 19, 2018
432
565
390
Until I see Microsoft purchase one of the big substantial Japanese developers then It’s a non issue for me. They can have at the American developers EA included.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bruno_Arrais85

makaveli60

Member
Jan 7, 2018
2,077
3,456
505
At this rate Sony will be behind and they don't really have the cash to catch up. Long term wise things could get bad for Sony and no one should be happy about that.
Yeah, I hope they are frightened as fuck right now. A couple of weeks ago I wasn't even thinking about what to buy, PS5 was it for me, then a couple of years later the XSX, if it has enough exclusives I'm interested in. But arrogant Sony 2.0 with this incompetent shit new management fucked it up so much, that the only reason that I want to buy a PS5 at launch (though not much chance, as it's sold out...) is that I can replay my favorite current gen games (as PS4 was my main, with a large catalog) in better quality on the new TV I bought for nextgen. Though even that has me in doubt as they don't give a fuck about people like me who would like to know more about BC. I still hate MS for the Series S too but currently if I have to decide which company seems more consumer friendly, it's MS without a doubt. And that Zenimax/Bethesda purchase and possible others they are starting to become a real opposition again. I'm really interested in how this "war" will continue.
 
Dec 20, 2018
494
1,890
505

If it had a red accent then I'd be convinced it was about Sonic.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Keihart

Eliciel

Member
Oct 30, 2009
1,741
905
1,095
They bought a lot of studios in the last two years , surely this is them done. No way we see another one as big as Bethesda

Microsoft Cash Reserves are $136.6 bln
You refer to that based on ability to do so or based on accumulated studios and the fact that they might reached a level of accomplishment that's enough?
I mean, if it comes to the rules, they can buy quite a bit more before having issues with authorities for any form of monopoly and potentially predatory pricing issues and, by the end of the day, I guess they have had their fair share of experience being a monopoly/oligopoly for software for many years to be honest.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: FranXico

Tomeru

Member
Aug 20, 2014
2,364
1,252
630
Israel
Mountains of salt...

How many studios did sony build from the ground up as opposed to buying?

Almost all of them. Think about turn10 and playground. Years of exclusive colabs, with buying them as just making it official. You think sony didnt pour money into all of its exclusives before those studios became part of sony? Same with t10 and playground.

Also, there is a gulf of difference between buying a studio and buying a something like zenimax. This is a step up of a whole different magnitude.

Yeah, I know money is money, but before msft or sony bought their past studios, they developed working relationship with them over the years.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Keihart
May 8, 2006
5,628
250
1,555
Spain
steamcommunity.com
Yeah, why couldn’t they create a studio like Insomniac or Guerilla The way Sony did?


Sarcasm, right?

London, 8th December 2005 – Sony Computer Entertainment today announced that it has acquired leading developer Guerrilla Games to further expand its development capability as part of Worldwide Studios (SCE WWS). In a strategic move to secure long term excellence in game development for current and future PlayStation® platforms, the acquisition of Guerrilla has formalised the already close working relationship between Sony Computer Entertainment and the studio.

Sony has revealed the price it paid to make long-time collaborator Insomniac Games part of the PlayStation family. According to a filing made today with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, the acquisition of the studio cost Sony ¥ 24,895 million ($229 million), paid out mainly in cash.

Naughty Dog, LLC (formerly JAM Software, Inc.[1][2]) is an American first-party video game developer based in Santa Monica, California.[3] Founded by Andy Gavin and Jason Rubin in 1984 as an independent developer,[1] the studio was acquired by Sony Computer Entertainment in 2001

Psygnosis Limited (later known as Sony Studio Liverpool and SCE Studio Liverpool) was a British video game developer and publisher headquartered at Wavertree Technology Park in Liverpool, England.[1] Founded in 1984 by Ian Hetherington, Jonathan Ellis, and David Lawson, the company initially became known for well-received games on the Atari ST and Commodore Amiga. In 1993, it became a wholly owned subsidiary of Sony and began developing the original PlayStation and later became a part of Sony's Entertainment Worldwide Studios.

Yeah, "create" a studio they like Sony, they say
 
Feb 23, 2018
2,438
5,790
545
Sarcasm, right?









Yeah, "create" a studio they like Sony, they say
Every single one of those had long term relationships making Sony games though. And Psygnosis literally made Saturn and Nintendo 64 games while owned by Sony lol
 

soulbait

Member
Mar 9, 2020
315
344
275
LOST EVERY GENERATION

Lost by whose metric?

If they are meeting their business goals, the shareholders are happy that the Xbox division still exists, and the higher ups are willing to pour more money into it, I would say that by their metrics they are winning. You think that Ford looks at the sales numbers of other competitors to decide if they "won" or not? Sure, sales over your competitor is one metric, but it is not the main metric businesses measure themselves by. You think Chick-Fil-A gets all bent out of shape when they realize McDonald's sells more quarter pounders versus their chicken sandwich? No, they worry about their bottom line.

Only fanboys get all out of shape of "who wins a generation" and the sales numbers of a particular console. As long as a console manufactures' sales that I bought are enough to continue to fund the business, that is all I care about. I could care less if they are the first in sales or somewhere else.
 

SlimySnake

Member
Feb 5, 2013
12,873
36,463
1,260
Good to see MS finally showing up to play. More competition is always a good thing. This will help, not hurt customers in the long run.
 

Keihart

Member
Jun 23, 2013
5,898
4,410
875
Sarcasm, right?









Yeah, "create" a studio they like Sony, they say
You probably need to go read some wikipedia and watch some game documentaries, seems like you have no idea of how those studios even became relevant.
 
Last edited:

quest

Not Banned from OT
Jul 17, 2004
6,212
3,214
1,695
Good to see MS finally showing up to play. More competition is always a good thing. This will help, not hurt customers in the long run.
Exactly this was just a response to Sony blatantly trying to content starve them with money hats. You go to every major 3rd party looking to money hat expect a measured response. Ryan fired shots now Microsoft is responding in kind. Can't money hat starfield anymore lol. About time the Microsoft board stepped up and took steps to fight back and build the gaming division.
 

massivekettle

Member
Jun 2, 2013
3,713
324
785
Some did that in ONE generation, so yeah 😐
As for the interview, yeah another company thought the same...and then Sony took their toys away.

By "some", you mean only Sony, and only its PS2.

I'm excluding handhelds obviously.

Microsoft's Xbox outsold (I believe) Nintendo's GameCube, and the 360 ran the PS3 pretty close. Only the Xbone in my mind was a true failure.
 
May 8, 2006
5,628
250
1,555
Spain
steamcommunity.com
Exactly this was just a response to Sony blatantly trying to content starve them with money hats. You go to every major 3rd party looking to money hat expect a measured response. Ryan fired shots now Microsoft is responding in kind. Can't money hat starfield anymore lol. About time the Microsoft board stepped up and took steps to fight back and build the gaming division.

I don't think this is a response to that, I think this is their strategy for Game Pass, acquire studios so you can build a decent/great library for your customers, and to attract new ones.

While Sony seems to be approaching an old school strategy, offering money to lock down exclusives, whether temporary or full exclusives, MS went for a different approach, a risky one, but if the xCloud tech works then they might lead the game streaming generation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Forsythia

Leyasu

Member
Apr 25, 2014
6,371
3,678
720
Almost all of them. Think about turn10 and playground. Years of exclusive colabs, with buying them as just making it official. You think sony didnt pour money into all of its exclusives before those studios became part of sony? Same with t10 and playground.

Also, there is a gulf of difference between buying a studio and buying a something like zenimax. This is a step up of a whole different magnitude.

Yeah, I know money is money, but before msft or sony bought their past studios, they developed working relationship with them over the years.
Developing a relationship and then buying doesn't change the fact. We both know this no matter what spin is put on it.

Simple fact is that Microsoft are looking at gaming and content differently. They see the potential of streaming service, and know for it too work they need the content. Disney went on a spree before launching +, and microsoft are doing the same. Whether people like it or not, that is their goal.

When they have constantly talked about not being in competition with Sony, it is starting to become clearer why they have been saying that. They are going to become a behemoth in gaming, with everything possible on their service. Good or bad for the industry? Only time will tell.

They are going their own way now, and content is key to their plans.

As I wrote earlier, this a long term plan.
 
Last edited:

Business

Member
Nov 12, 2010
4,408
1,335
1,150
Phil fails to create any meaningful first party studios or output since 2014, gives him 7.5B to spend in 2020 so now we got studios, Satya pats him in the back with a proud face. Can’t say Satya is not a nice guy.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: CatLady

Bitmap Frogs

Mr. Community
Dec 26, 2008
12,641
7,722
1,560
Spain
You call selling >150m consoles over 3 generations a failure?

Over the last 3 generations

Sony has sold: 460 million units.
Nintendo: 400 million units.

Notably, both companies made money. Xbox has yet to break even.

Essentially, Xbox biggest success has been their ability to convince Microsoft higher-ups to keep dumping money into it.

And hey, I will say I am glad xbox exists: they've moved the industry forward.
 
Last edited:

soulbait

Member
Mar 9, 2020
315
344
275
Units sold
Software units sold
Number of games available
Mindshare and customer loyalty.

I asked whose, not which.

No where was I trying to say that Xbox was the top in any of those. I was not ignoring the massive sales lead by Sony either. If you read what I wrote though, I was talking about actual metrics that businesses themselves look at. What you listed are indeed metrics Microsoft would want to increase (every company would), but as a business they would not necessarily consider themselves "losing a generation" based off of those metrics. The idea that Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo (or PC) wins a generation is fanboys' talking points and that's it. In the business itself, they are more concerned with other metrics.

I just get the idea from many posting on here that every decision MS or Sony make, they are thinking about getting back at the other company some how so they can win this "war". In reality, they have their own business goals they set, and they consider they have "won" if they meet those goals.
 

itsnotme

Member
Sep 9, 2020
199
935
405
Who doesn't love monopolies!! Man this is generally super bad. This is probably going to trigger Google and Amazon to start buying studios aswell. Sony is probably going to go down the Nintendo route.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Keihart

BattleScar

Member
Jul 29, 2016
1,133
2,362
485
Well, probably I won't need to, I just wanted to clarify those studios were acquired by Sony, it's a fact.
Difference being, they didn't buy them after they had created multi-billion dollar IP's.
Buying those studios, whilst still problematic in some sense, is not even close to just buying Minecraft or ZeniMax.

In some way those studios gained their notoriety as a direct result of Sony. Meanwhile, Microsoft is purchasing already popular IP to strengthen their portfolio.

Let's be honest, Sony doesn't have the money to pull moves like Microsoft.
 
  • LOL
Reactions: CatLady

massivekettle

Member
Jun 2, 2013
3,713
324
785
Over the last 3 generations

Sony has sold: 460 million units.
Nintendo: 400 million units.

Notably, both companies made money. Xbox has yet to break even.

Essentially, Xbox biggest success has been their ability to convince Microsoft higher-ups to keep dumping money into it.

And hey, I will say I am glad xbox exists: they've moved the industry forward.

How did you come up with 400m units for Nintendo?

Gamecube sold 21m, Wii+ Wii U sold 120m-ish and Switch sold 60m.
 
May 8, 2006
5,628
250
1,555
Spain
steamcommunity.com
Difference being, they didn't buy them after they had created multi-billion dollar IP's.
Buying those studios, whilst still problematic in some sense, is not even close to just buying Minecraft or ZeniMax.

In some way those studios gained their notoriety as a direct result of Sony. Meanwhile, Microsoft is purchasing already popular IP to strengthen their portfolio.

Let's be honest, Sony doesn't have the money to pull moves like Microsoft.


Sony played safe bets, they knew what they were acquiring because of previous works with those studios, but the talent were already in those studios. Lets just take a look at the most recent acquisition, Insomniac, I think Sony acquired them because Insomniac showed them they could work for other platforms, and Sony didn't want to be late to the party, that's why they acquired them, otherwise they would have saved their moneys.

Smart acquisitions, excellent management, but acquisitions after all.
 
Last edited:

BattleScar

Member
Jul 29, 2016
1,133
2,362
485
Sony played safe bets, they knew what they were acquiring because of previous works with those studios, but the talent were already in those studios. Lets just take a look at the most recent acquisition, Insomniac, I think Sony acquired them because Insomniac showed them they could work for other platforms, and Sony didn't want to be late to the party, that's why they acquired them, otherwise they would have saved their moneys.

Smart acquisitions, excellent management, but acquisitions after all.
Yeah for sure. Smart acquisitions that can be built upon.
As I said, they don't have the money to walk in and buy out something that's already successful and popular, just to bolster their portfolio.
 

Clear

Member
Feb 2, 2009
13,515
9,493
1,365
Sarcasm, right?









Yeah, "create" a studio they like Sony, they say

Those studios when they were bought bore no resemblance to how they are these days.

Orange games were tiny, they only became Guerilla during the making of Killzone, and grew from there,

Naughty Dog became what they are today only following the success of the Crash Bandicoot and later Ratchet and Clank.

Insomniac had a similar trajectory, starting off with near-forgotten titles like Disruptor on PS1, they broke out on the back of Spyro The Dragon, you know the other PS1-era mascot that Sony had.

The commonality is that all 3 started small, and grew up on Playstation.

Psygnosis is a bit of a funny one, excuse the lengthy digression but I think some history needs to be dropped for this particular story.

The actuality is that they started out at the beginning of the ST/Amiga era, and despite initially backing the wrong horse in that race, eventually became successful off the back of Amiga product. The funny part is that the stuff that made them was exclusively developed by bedroom-scale teams working off handshake-deals with Ian H. Who basically acted like the software equivalent of Tony Wilson, a NW UK based impressario.

From those deals we got DMA design, Reflections, Traveller's Tales, Bizarre Creations, and more who grew to be noteworthy creative forces in their own right.

The interesting thing is that these were all external developers, local in many cases, but not actually employed by Psygnosis. See the thing that defined Psygnosis wasn't actually their own product, because it was mostly mediocre or plain bad, they got by basically on a variant of the same strategy that Dave Lawson had used a few years earlier with his Spectrum publisher Imagine, it was all about the packaging and the image of the brand.

Imagine went under because it was all based on a small crew of in-house coders, and there's no doubt that Psygnosis would have gone the same way had they not lucked onto Shadow Of The Beast, Lemmings, and so on. Titles which again were made out-of-house.

Towards the end of the Amiga era they tried their hand at developing for SNES and Megadrive, again this was handled by the same external devs who by this point had grown from individuals and friends to actual small devs, although these titles were well received, they sold like shit and they ended up losing a ton of money. They rallied somewhat with licenses like Bram Stoker's Dracula (the royalties of which were partly withheld from TT in order to cover losses made on Puggsy the ill-fated SNES/Megadrive title) and finally started making headway when they teamed up with Sony Imagesoft for Mickey Mania. This is the point at which they landed on Sony's radar.

Long story short, things were improving for them but they were still on shaky ground mainly because their core Amiga business was falling apart. So when Sony was looking to leverage support for the Playstation they tapped into the grass-roots talent that Ian H was so good at finding. The underlying issue still remained though, their internal dev teams were never equal to those independents, so although they hit paydirt occasionally with titles like Wipeout, their in-house product was mostly forgettable crap like Life Force Tenka and G-Police. Hyped sure, but mostly not good games.

This was the creeping cancer that always afflicted Psygnosis, and it only got worse after the Sony buyout. There's a shitload of drama I could talk about, such as Ian H basically getting himself frogmarched off the premises by ignoring Sony's orders and doing a N64 port of Wipeout, the hideous clusterfuck of the F1 deal, so much more...
The place was always deeply dysfunctional, which is why after the endless disaster of the PS2 and PS3 eras, they ended up as the red-headed stepchild of Sony's UK development scene. They couldn't get anything greenlit, and eventually got shut-down and depreciated to QA/cert hub.

Bottom line, Psygnosis were always kinda shit, and honestly its miraculous they lasted as long as they did.
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
  • Like
Reactions: kruis and Agent X