Phil Spencer, Xbox's top dog, has made it clear that it remains interested in acquisitions, with one eye on the Asian games industry.
Microsoft made history when it concluded its enormous $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard King. Though this took a long time to close, it followed on from the corporation previously purchasing ZeniMax Media, which includes Bethesda and all its subsidiaries.
Now, the company's main focus is on absorbing Activision Blizzard employees across its business, but Spencer says it's still on the lookout for other acquisitions in the future. "We definitely want to be in the market, and when we can find teams and technology and capability that add to what we’re trying to do in gaming at Microsoft, absolutely we will keep our heads up," He said in an interview with Bloomberg.
He added that deals which add "geographic diversity" may be worthwhile, as well as potentially another mobile development company. Microsoft is apparently eyeing talent in China after working with Tencent to bring Age of Empires to mobile. Spencer comments that there's nothing "imminent", however.
"It’s been a good area for us to learn from creative teams that have real unique capability," said Spencer. "The real opportunity is to partner with creative teams in China for global."
His interest in Asian studios is worth pointing out, especially in light of the closure of Japanese team Tango Gameworks back in May. That's something of a bitter pill to swallow, though to be completely fair, Spencer appears to be focusing his attention on Chinese mobile developers, which Tango was not.
Anyway, if and when Microsoft does plan to acquire more studios or publishers, it may have a knock-on effect on PS5 and PS4 users; anything produced under the company's umbrella might not be ported to Sony's hardware. However, this exclusivity mindset does appear to be shifting, at least at Xbox, with several first-party titles making the jump earlier this year, and Bethesda's Indiana Jones and the Great Circle due to arrive on PS5 next Spring.
Speaking of which, the interview also touches on Microsoft's multiplatform game releases, with Spencer not ruling out any existing first-party games for release on PlayStation formats.
[source bloomberg.com]
Comments 125
Aquire publisher, lay off some folks, close studios, some folks walk away, and then those folks form another inde studio....cycle continues......
Ubisoft for sure in nr future
They're genuinely pathetic, they just fired thousands of people and they still need more?
There legally barred from making another purchase for a significant amount of time who can they possibly be intrested in buying
The rich getting richer....yay.
And those games will also be on PlayStation also.word up son
Of course not they are not done buying. Microsoft doesn't stop spending until they are #1. The company has way too much power as it is, unfortunately.
Imagine being Tango Gameworks or Arkane Austin getting shut down by Microsoft only to find out they're looking for your replacement.
@Drago201
Privately owned studios and entities.
As long as they leave PlayStation and Nintendo alone.
Yeah would be difficult but never say never…..
No M$, just no.
Alright, can't wait to see what companies/studios they'll gobble up next and do absolutely nothing with!
Removed - inappropriate
Removed - trolling/baiting
Removed - trolling/baiting
Microsoft should buy Krafton and shutter tango for a second time. It’s also nice to see that Phil has learned nothing.
@MeanBeanEgg two of them as well, it's great having Xbox fanboys come here so they can join the ignore list.
@Rog-X. Phi spencer is bringing more games to PlayStation so its all good.word up son
@Major_Player Clapping like a lobotomised seal for further consolidation/enshittification of the industry sure is a choice.
They definitely won't be able to buy any more huge publishers like EA, Capcom etc, but I suppose by his wording they are looking out for mobile developers or someone from China to make some gacha games for them. Probably to help them become a bigger publisher when they transition to becoming fully third party. Nothing for Playstation to worry about like with their previous acquisitions.
As long as they leave Capcom alone, I genuinely don’t care about anyone else that they would acquire. Ubisoft are damaged to all hell now, they would take extreme work to get back on their feet, so if that was the next company Microsoft went for, no worries. Besides, it is clear as day that Microsoft are transitioning to 3rd party, so for the mainstream gamer, there will be little effect to what they play as everything will be on PlayStation regardless.
"We want to stay in the market" said as if Microsoft was at any risk of disappearing form it, poor underdogs that they are and all.
If the games come to playstation and PC anyway, does it really matter?
Oh good who’s next? Naughty dog? If you can’t beat em, buy em!!!
It’s a bit unsavory to talk about acquisitions after they have been laying off people, closing studios and can barely manage what they have at hand
@Athrum
I mean, YoY hardware sales keeps dropping, GP subscriptions have stalled and the only revenue they have comes from Actvision IPs.
Things aren't good for Xbox division and they are relying on MS shareholders goodwill to stay afloat.
If I had to guess he's probably waiting for Lina Khan to be gone who was the most vicious against monopolies and acquisitions. So yeah expect Microsoft to go on a shopping spree again and no one will stop them 🤷
I’d rather Sony make some acquisitions. I see them as the underdog here, not Microsoft. Atleast Sony earned their way in the gaming space by delivering great quality games through the decades. Microsoft has been struggling for longer than a decade now to create really compelling games.
Yeah sure, let the trillion dollar company who cant create games buy up everything. They already bought two of the biggest 3rd party publishers in the world.
We all know Sony isn't able to do the same on that scale. Are we really going to let Microsoft just buy up everything? Yuck!
Making gaming mainstream was a huge mistake. Pure greed makes for a sh*t incentive in a creative industry.
But either the masses will gobble up their bland, made by committee, slop or they will not. The market will decide. All I know is that MS seems to want to cement their place besides EA and Ubisoft as a unholy trinity of industry enshittification.
Aquire NetEase and Ubisoft and gaming monopol is yours... That Blizzard acquisition was failure of system and only example that Microsoft can do anything and keep gamemakers as hostages of their own will.
As someone pretty openly ambivalent towards the Acti-Blizz acquisition, now's about the time they stop. They haven't even done anything with their numerous acquisitions besides Starfield, timed exclusivity, GamePass/CoD cross promotion, and mass layoffs.
Let's stabilize, establish ourselves, and then think about more growth.
@LogicStrikesAgain honestly i'd rather see sony invest in some of these brand new studios that have way more potential , then already established ones. a lot of these new studios are made up of people with a lot of experience in gaming already.
The more they acquire the harder the pushback will become. At some point you have to call it what it is. A monopoly!
@twitchtvpat I’d like to see them do both. I think Sony should really acknowledge the fact that, if they don't make moves, other companies might make it for them. Making acquisitions i think is needed, for them to maintain competitive advantage. Hate to see Sony be left behind in the gaming space, just because they don’t have the same purchasing power as other companies.
Im sure thats great news to the 2500 staff they aquired and then sacked.
I guess atcthis point they are becoming a 3rd party publisher, so at least further purchases are not with the intention of withholding games from other platforms.
Great news for the industry… said absolute idiots!
I wonder if they will be looking into mobile gaming studios? KING is obviously bringing in silly money with very little effort, so I could probably see them looking for something along the same lines?
Guess they will buy ubisoft. They bought everybody else.
Please don't buy SE.
They just want to buy up everything so they can still make money once they give up on consoles. I’m so tired of gaming companies just being bought up lately. Just leave things alone. It doesn’t end well for anyone involved.
I'm telling you Microsoft is playing the long game. Once streaming games is the norm they will be positioned to take the #1 spot.
Not sure who’s left for them to buy. Maybe they think China will let them buy MiHoYo.
At this point if MS isn’t buying a company then either PIF or Tencent is. Maybe those 2 will merge and eventually buy MS? “We’re in the end game now.” Dr. Strange voice.
https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/saudis-pif-owned-unit-buys-265-mln-stake-chinese-gaming-company-vspo-2023-02-16/
It's simple, MS will just end up buying SONY.
I'll try to take a balanced approach here to avoid being shot down.
Regarding closures and layoffs, these have happened across the industry and aren't specific to Microsoft. (Remember Firewall?)
Regarding acquisitions, these aren't specific to Microsoft. Sony have acquired many, many studios over the years and completely locked their games to PlayStation hardware (and only recently PC & Switch)
Regarding a multiplatform approach, this isn't specific to Microsoft. Sony have realised that the way the industry is heading, they need to generate more income by being on more platforms. I think Microsoft's tactic right now is to get more people invested in their IP so that those customers keep playing in a hardware agnostic future world.
Regarding the future, software will be king and bespoke hardware will be completely unnecessary. All games will be sold digitally and streamed or downloaded to a disguised PC/set top box. It will be user friendly like a console and be made by traditional PC hardware manufacturers. PlayStation, Steam and Xbox storefronts will be there and you'll be able to "buy" whatever you want.
If a future like this pans out then Microsoft's rush to acquire software but total lack of focus towards hardware makes complete sense. They'll have tons of IP you won't be able to play unless you "buy" it via their store or subscribe to something like Game Pass.
Whilst I understand the attachment that people have towards a particular machine or brand, I think it would be better if everyone could access any game they wanted without having to buy multiple systems.
@__jamiie Agree. Excellent analysis.
@Cloud39472
Yes, it does matter.
@The_Wailing_Doom OK... want to add anything to that?
@DonkeyFantasy haha absolutely! Also i imagine Call Of Duty has cost them a small fortune (again) lolol
@Cloud39472
Monopolies don't happen overnight. Turning a blind eye to the repercussions of industry consolidation because the games are still coming to your platform of choice for now does not excuse the consolidation of power. Having outsized power to decide which games get made or don't and whether they come to certain platforms on day one or not at all is still bad no matter what current Microsoft leadership thinks is a good idea. The leadership will change someday and Microsoft's "benevolence" can change just as easily.
@The_Wailing_Doom True enough. Gaming seems to be headed in a direction that's not really for me anyway (streaming,digital only etc) so I guess at least for now, it doesn't matter to me either way.
@__jamiie Sony may have acquired many studios over the years, but that usually happened when they were small fry and their potential was recognised. Microsoft have done the same, but they also went out and bought two massive slabs of the multi format industry.
Comparing the two is a joke.
The Japanese government isn’t gonna let Microsoft buy any big Japanese publisher.
@Nei I mean, the same applies to Sony this year as well, right?
@LogicStrikesAgain Earned their way? That is up for debate.
Shut down studios, sack hundreds, ZeniMax workers on strike. Hey. Let's buy more studios. Great idea
The way Xbox operate you’d think they were laundering money
All 3 have their moments of deals, Sony/Nintendo have fewer buyouts as well for particular reasons besides their less than Microsoft's money scale being a factor.
Xbox/Microsoft: We want Japanese/kids games support, furthers to go and make deals however possible but still gets the same only Xbox stereotypical audience will accept games for a reason as less of a risk in sales or deals to make.
We know audiences tell us things but we will learn nothing, be all talk and continue to do so, it's worked for us so far.
Only few odd times they got Japanese visual novel or other AA RPGs to get on Gamepass which are risks taken not surprised but did they likely do well on Gamepass I doubt it because the stereotypical audience didn't care only the niche audience on Xbox that wants them to happen and I feel sorry for that audience that wants them but at the same time they either got to them on Switch/PlayStation systems prior or really waited for them on Xbox..
Gets Tango goes hmm we need to let them know we only accept live service games not creative projects, you want more staff for a sequel, goodbye, you want anything else unreasonable, goodbye, enough money and forget niches but Ninja Theory got funding and a pass for reasons or get rid of them to save on money later maybe too who knows.
We want games on Gamepass but they have to be offering consistency of subscribers/sales expectations no one can match but we don't care because we will kill you off if you don't meet our unrealistic expectations besides the 'flexiblity' we seem to show everyone we really don't have that it just looks nice on paper doesn't it. XD
It may be for more staff/more money but we don't care. You want support, nope.
Bethesda/Activision can offer unrealistic expectations for studios to get used to trends and not be creative and we cut off whoever we want, so we align well with them that's why we bought them because were hypocrites and want their IPs, not talent, we just like to get money/mess with people. XD Need that COD/King money after all.
We want money we don't want talent that'd be ridiculous. We only take uncreative projects here it's why everything on Gamepassi has variety but is a mess and we don't care about overseeing to make sure they land well or whatever goes on Gamepass works we just want something to come out and be a big hit but won't work out why they aren't and understand audiences that requires time and effort we don't have because we like to blind ourselves in money/stupidity then actually pay attention to the market correctly.
But it's ok we get money from PC/PS/Nintendo so it's ok right, put them everywhere.
Audiences: So they say they want something, seem to keep laying them off/not trying hard enough, get the same safe deals and you wonder why we think Xbox is a joke and don't bother to support them.
They have variety but no impact so that impact matters a lot and they seem to be too stupid to realise.
The presentation/marketing is hilarious, the gameplay is sub par (I don't care for PS5 1st party either but those that do by all means enjoy them). Nintendo at least besides their business practices the products are a least appealing enough (I mean the niche ones they are now supporting again/more than ever, while also offering battle royale old tweaked games so they still follow trends in their own ways, not just Mario, Zelda, Pokemon all the time).
Part 2:
The OG/360 days are over of Asian game support to the same extent but at the same time Xbox will keep asking for Asian game support and get less of it for a reason, audiences may care for it, Xbox don't and can't bridge the gap, their tools, sales and 'all talk' is enough for audiences and devs to be fed up with it. When will they learn we moved on because they can't make up their minds, want only money and don't actually listen.
Xbox can get stuffed. I'm fine with the games on any platform but they are mindless on strategies so weak and hilarious, Sega did PC during the Saturn. Did Coleco Chameleon during or after Dreamcast, they had Pokemon on Piko. They have had many things over the years. No one says a rule against a console is the case, never has been but some are also smarter too.
Sony bought up studios but they still built up their own besides that and still kept many around even if those bought like Zipper, Studio Liverpool, Evolution/Big Big, Guerilla (playing Shellshock Nam 67, one of their games before Killzone) and more but some still stand even if Zip, Liver, Guerilla Cambridge and more didn't they still got their time, Liverpool are Firesprite and still around somewhat. Their creativity/goals have changed but we got enough of it at least besides the to me at least eh state and put me off PlayStation but they have an audience that's interested at least.
They fit purpose when Sony/Nintendo buys a studio it has value besides the goals, they have fair security I think....... (even if Alpha Dream bought or not died so.... that was intended or not? but others like Next Level or others have a different value).
Xbox just buys studios and their purpose is 'has budget/funding, has to meet Gamepass model somehow, be anything we give flexibility apparently, bad overseeing and be uncreatively money makers and variety that somehow lands as how else will Gamepass survive, but could be cut off any minute as no stability if ask for too much of more staff or other unreasoable things'.
Are people comparing Sony's Acquisitions to Microsofts 😑, there's a night and day difference.
@cburg Playstation revolutionized gaming with the PS1, introducing CD based games. The PS2 is the best selling console of all time. They are one of the biggest global gaming brands in the world, with massive cultural influence. Market leader for multiple generations. They’ve created some of the most popular and best selling consoles. And every console generation, they have been synonymous with high quality and critically acclaimed games.
So yes, they have undeniably earned their space in gaming. Are you really arguing that they havent?
@LogicStrikesAgain Let's not pretend they did not get to this position through shady business tactics.
@SuntannedDuck2 I honestly believe one of the main reasons Microsoft bought both Bethesda and Activision was to hurt Sony, it's funny how Sony had exclusive deals with both of them and were about to get Starfield, yet Microsoft then buys them. They also went after Sega with marketing deals for the Persona games yet Sony usually had the deals for those games.
@SuntannedDuck2 Quite a decertation.
@UltimateOtaku91 They probably did. They did clearly see signs of hmm this could work, cut them off as soon as possible.
Yeah they have had odd deals, I forget a few of them but even still.
Also yeah I said the Sony buying studios (obviously Nixxe and others are more recent but then again have their intended purpose, talent and more) back in the day but they still lasted a while longer then Xbox and they still had purpose then aiming and missing Xbox has in comparison we see these days.
@cburg Yeah it's long, it's a bit of a mess. Just thoughts coming to mind.
That and doing a comment pretending to be the audience/Xbox adds a twist even if I kind of messed it up. XD
@UltimateOtaku91 If Sony could have bought those studios, they would have. They just didn't have enough money, and never will. Why would Sony want exclusive deals with Bethesda? To hurt Xbox and to a lesser extent Nintendo. Just like they have been money hatting for the last 10 years. Sony does not want competition.
@SuntannedDuck2 I have to say I am impressed. I could never write that in such a short period of time.
@cburg by “decertation” do you mean ‘dissertation’?
@cburg I've broken the character limits on Push Square and YT comment sections (really long in comparison) before if that also furthers boosts my bad commitment to overthinking, having a lot to say.
I can't help it sometimes I just get script/essay length responses out in comment sections. Too many thoughts, too many examples to make of connections to things. Fast typing. Can't be helped too in the zone for it sometimes, that and over-editing the comments as well. XD
@Balaam_ agreed I thought they meant that, looked it up went yeah that spelling sounds more like it and the mean they were going for. Thought there was a different spelling/meaning I was missing the context of. XD
@cburg Its not like Microsoft haven't money hatted games either, last gen they had Titanfall, Dead Rising, Tomb Raider, Ryse, Alan Wake, Sunset Overdrive as third party exclusives timed or full. Even this gen they've had The Medium, Stalker 2, Palworld, Scorn, High on Life, Ark 2 and some smaller indies as exclusives, and even a Kojima game coming as exclusive. So you can't just point the finger at Sony, who pretty much only go for Asian games for deals lately.
@Balaam_ Yes, sorry.
@cburg Are you suggesting that any major company operates without using some level of shady practices? Microsoft is no stranger to shady practices either. Regardless of both engaging in it, Xbox hasn't achieved anything close to the success or cultural impact Sony has achieved in the gaming space.
@LogicStrikesAgain I am not suggesting MS doesn't have shady practices. They do. No question about it.
@UltimateOtaku91 No offense but this is such drivel. You cannot compare the Sony money hatting to MS. Hogwarts, Call of Duty, Wukong, Deathloop, Ghostwire Tokio, Fortnight, Starfield, etc. Paying developers to keep the games off game pass. Sony wants to destroy their competition at any cost, and that includes Nintendo.
@Rog-X Tell me you’re a MS fanboy without telling me you’re a MS fanboy. XD
@cburg If you acknowledge that every company engages in shady practices, why even bring it up in the first place? It doesn't take away the cultural impact and legacy Playstation has earned in the gaming space.
Something you said, was up for debate.
@cburg Sony “moneyhatting” a game is not the same as Msft buying a publisher. When Sony makes a deal with a studio or publishers, they are only securing 1 game for their platform. They dont take away the possibility for Microsoft to also make deals with them. They are free to also make exclusivity deals with studios, same as their strategy was in the 360 era.
The difference is, when you buy up the whole publisher. No one will have the possibility to make deals ever again. Cause they are now off the market, leaving no room for competition in terms of having the ability to make deals with the studio. Thats the difference.
@Drago201 Isn't that in the US only though not Asian markers
@cburg Xbox community still using Wukong despite there being no evidence besides a two bit salty journalist like Corden.
Using timed deals when Nintendo and Microsoft do them is ridiculous but to compare them to publisher buyouts is even more ridiculous.
@cburg “ Sony wants to destroy their competition at any cost, and that includes Nintendo”
Are you really that naive? You don't think Xbox, or any company for that matter is there to outcompete their competitors? Have you even read some of the emails from the Actiblizz trial, where Msft openly talks about buying Nintendo, or that they have the money to effectively outspend Sony so that they aren't able to compete any longer.
I don't know who they gonna buy next but i hope they stay away from Japan, China, and Korea devs.
@LogicStrikesAgain "I’d rather Sony make some acquisitions"
I'd rather Sony stop any acquisition and just focus on what they have right now. They got baited into stupid acquisition race with MS and wasted $3 billions for Bungie and who knows how much with Firewalk and Haven Studios.
Heck, i rather they expand Team Asobi into a bigger studio so they can working on two games in the same time instead of one. Hired back any ex-Japan Studios and get them do a new IP or revive classic ones like Ape Escape, Wild Arms, etc that really needs a revival.
@LogicStrikesAgain the Xbox community likes to delude themselves that Microsoft are victims.
@TeiGekiLord That’s why I don’t participate in Xbox communities outside of things like getting help with my 360 really. They always act like Microsoft can do no wrong, but throw a tantrum if Sony or Nintendo do any of the same things.
@Drago201
Chinese or Korean mobile devs. MS wants its hands in everything.
@PuppetMaster I get what you’re saying, but those were questionable acquisitions, to say the least. Im talking Capcom, FromSoftware, CDPR, Square Enix, Take Two. Publishers who actually possess a large pool of successful IP’s.
The gaming landscape has changed. Microsoft has set a precedent by buying two of the biggest publishers in the world. And more importantly, now owns some of the biggest IP’s in the industry. Now other companies are paying attention. Gaming is gonna get consolidated, whether we like it or not. If Sony doesn't make strategic acquisition on some of those publishers, some other company eventually will. Relying on Team Asobi or other first party studios, while others buy the biggest IPs in existence like GTA for example would in my opinion be a weak move.
Im not necessarily for consolidation, but Microsoft has opened the gates. If Sony doesn't atleast make a few key acquisitions and obtain some of those high selling and high profile IP’s, they might be left behind.
Parts of it is just speculation though, but this is just my take on the situation.
Edit: I 100% support the idea of Team Asobi growing their studio and making 2 games at the same time! 😃
Removed - trolling/baiting
@Major_Player Well, anything can happen 😁
@LogicStrikesAgain : The possibilities are endless....😁
Xbox does not deserve any Asian studios after what happened with Tango Gameworks.
Removed - off-topic
@PuppetMaster Let's be real Sony does not have the funds to compete with MS.
I dont like this piece saying but it's not Japanese so it's not that bad. They just closed a successful studio and fired thousands of people and this is considered a normal thing.
@cburg … ngl - trying to read it gave me actual whiplash
If I was an Asian studio and MS came knocking, I’d tell them to go away.
This article about Xbox Asian acquisitions does it rounds on gaming sites once every two years.
Maybe they should manage the ones they already bought.
@Flaming_Kaiser Funnily, Sony always came out on top of the competition with better strategy, marketing, and lineup games. Not sure why MS always fked up despite they have more money than Sony lol. But i guess money also the reason why MS always fked up. They think with money alone they can win the competition easily.
@LogicStrikesAgain "Relying on Team Asobi or other first party studios, while others buy the biggest IPs in existence like GTA for example would in my opinion be a weak move."
Meanwhile Nintendo doesn't do any acquisition and just rely heavily on their 1st party studios and they can sold more Switch than PS5 & Xbox series combine. Heck, Nintendo only need to sell 16-17 million more units to reach PS2 numbers. So i don't think it's a weak move if Sony heavily rely on their 1st party studios just like Nintendo.
I mean. Back in PS3 era when pretty much all big 3rd party goes full multiplat especially Japanese devs like SE, Konami, Capcom, or Bamco who always made exclusives for Sony. What save PS3 and turn the table against X360 was mostly Sony 1st party games. Titles like TloU, Uncharted, GOW, LBP, Resistance, Killzone, GT, Infamous, Ratchet, Motorstorm, SingStar, Demon's Souls, and Socom did the heavy lifting for PS3.
If Sony can do it back in PS3 era then i say Sony can do it for this gen and in the future too, especially when right now Sony is in better financial compare to PS3 era where they're bleeding money left and right and almost bankrupt.
@PuppetMaster You make good points,,
However im not saying its a weak move to focus on first party. I said its a weak move if other companies are snatching up these valuable IPs and Sony just let it happen without trying to acquire some themselves.
Let me clarify something, im not saying they should stop making great first party games. Ofcourse they should always focus on first party and keep creating quality games. Im just saying, better acquire some of these publishers for their IP’s, before some other company does.
Imagine someone else acquiring Capcom, FromSoftware or Take Two. I mean, Sony has some good IP’s, but not nearly on the level of something like GTA.
About Nintendo, they’re the biggest brand in gaming. Mario is the biggest IP ever. And they have several more. Sony has nothing compared to it. So yeah, that actually fits my argument about them needing to acquire some of those high profile high selling IPs.
Removed - off-topic
Removed - off-topic
@MrPeanutbutterz I get that the scale of acquisitions is hugely different. However if you compare the number of games that have been shared since acquisition then Microsoft is massively ahead.
Sony buy companies and lock their games to their hardware.
Microsoft buy companies and have (and will continue) to allow those games on multiple platforms.
That's why the comparison is relevant.
@__jamiie No, it's still a disingenuous comparison because the Xbox division thought they could buy their way to the top of the console pile by outspending the competition (like they do in other sectors that Microsoft operate in), but it blew up in their faces because now Microsoft want to see some sort of return on that 76 billions dollars.
And if "Sony buy companies and lock games to their hardware", why are the likes of Ghost of Tsushima, The Last of Us, and Horizon available on PC? And why is the Lego Horizon game releasing on PC and Nintendo Switch?
@MrPeanutbutterz Microsoft have made games available on PlayStation and other platforms well before the ABK acquisition so your argument doesn't hold water. Minecraft and Bethesda titles spring to mind.
If you read my entire comment, I clearly mention that Sony have shifted recently to release games on other platforms. They too now realise that the cost and time of development isn't sustainable by tying something to one place.
@__jamiie you mean games that were already multiplatform?
@TeiGekiLord Those that were multiplatform could easily have been taken away and deals that were already agreed were honoured when they could have been cancelled. Deathloop/Ghost Wire Tokyo.
How many games have Sony allowed on Xbox?
@__jamiie how many of Sony's buyouts already released multiplatform IPs that were suddenly taken away?
@TeiGekiLord Just had a quick look online and Bend, Bluepoint, Firesprite, Guerrilla, Haven, Housemarque, Insomniac, Naughty Dog, Nixxes, Sucker Punch, Zipper Interactive and Bungie were all multi-platform studios before Sony bought them.
@__jamiie nice job not answering the question so I will ask it once more.
What multiplatform IPs did Sony make exclusive from their buyouts?
@TeiGekiLord Spider-Man.
@TeiGekiLord How many multiplatform IPs have Microsoft withheld from Sony?
@__jamiie Minecraft was already available multiplatform and prints money for them - you hardly thought they'd pull the plug on that? Bethesda games like... Starfield? You know games like Ghostwire and Death Loop only released because contracts were already signed before ethe Zenimax acquisition, right?
You've got someone else pointing out the gaping hole in your logic and are avoiding their direct question because your entire point collapses if you answer them honestly, so no, my argument does hold water.
But way to shift the goalposts entirely because you're disingenuously comparing Sony strategically buying smaller studios and growing them organically over the course of decades (which Microsoft also do) to Microsoft buying two of the biggest multi format publishing houses.
@__jamiie hahahaha, I knew you were talking garbage.
1. Spider-Man was offered to MS by Disney and they said no, Disney then went to Sony and they developed it. Sony took away nothing.
2. Hellblade 2
@MrPeanutbutterz @TeiGekiLord There's no hole in my logic and I'm not talking garbage. If you actually read my original post again you'll see that it all makes sense.
The Spider -Man IP went to Insomniac NOT Sony. Sony then acquired Insomniac 5 years later and made a previously multiplatform IP a console exclusive.
Microsoft could have cancelled the existing agreements in place with Bethesda quite easily but chose to honour them.
Starfield never existed as an IP on PlayStation so nothing was taken away.
Hellblade 2 will be on PlayStation very soon.
Sony as a company are only just starting to look at the end game. They are so hardware focussed as a business that that's the only thing they're looking at. Microsoft are playing the long game by realising that no-one will be making bespoke hardware in 20 years time. The more players they have playing their games now means that they're likely to retain that customer base when hardware is irrelevant.
@__jamiie now they're rewriting history to align with their garbage, amazing stuff.
@TeiGekiLord If you can't be bothered to Google it to prove that I'm right then fine.
Insomniac bought the IP from Marvel in 2014.
Sony bought Insomniac in 2019.
What history have I rewritten?
@__jamiie Your original post is comparing Microsoft buying two of the biggest publishing houses (and with them, some of the biggest and most beloved franchises in gaming) and thus a massive percentage of the multiformat industry to Sony occasionally buying smaller studios and then growing them organically. So yes, your post is garbage.
As is your comment about Insomniac acquiring Spider-Man (genuinely - WTF lol).
As is Starfield never being multiformat - it was in development for PS5 until Microsoft bought Bethesda and nuked it.
As is your comment Microsoft honouring existing contracts - they had to do that, they had no choice.
If Sony are so "hardware focused" then explain why the PS1, PS2 and PS4 dominated, and the PS5 is trouncing the Xbox? Because if nice hardware was all that was needed to sell to an audience, the Series X would be selling just as well. But it's not, because software is what sells a format. Similarly, the Nintendo Switch hasn't sold in excess of 140 million units because everyone wants an underpowered tablet with an HDMI out port.
@__jamiie By all means funrish us with proof of Insomniac buying the Spider-Man IP in 2014. You have the mic...
@MrPeanutbutterz From The Spider-Man games Wikipedia page.
"Marvel Games entered negotiations with SIE regarding developing third party games based on their characters, leading to frequent collaborative studio Insomniac Games being selected to acquire the license for the Spider-Man character from Activision in 2014."
@MrPeanutbutterz I've made it clear that the size of the acquisitions were completely different so stop repeating yourself. We all know that Sony could never afford an acquisition of that size.
My point (which is fact) is that all of Sony's acquisitions have locked content away, whereas Microsoft's have allowed content to remain where it was. What part of that don't you understand?
Look at Wikipedia for proof regarding Spider-Man.
Starfield was originally developed with PS5 in mind but was cancelled by Microsoft. The fact remains that it was a new franchise so there was no previous engagement with PlayStation players. No prequels that had built an audience on PlayStation. Therefore it's very different to something like Doom which has had an audience on PlayStation.
Microsoft absolutely had a choice in honouring those contracts. No new owner legally has to honour previously agreed contracts if the legal entity owning those contracts changes.
Sony ARE a hardware focussed company and are hardware focussed. Microsoft ARE a software focussed company. What part of those two sentences are untrue?
My point (which again you've missed) spoke towards the future games industry when bespoke hardware will be irrelevant. Sony want to sell boxes to tie you to their ecosystem. Microsoft want to tie you to their ecosystem irrespective of hardware. Something that their new marketing campaign (revealed today) confirms.
@__jamiie Acquiring a licence to work on the IP isn't remotely the same as (you said) "buying the IP from Marvel" though, now is it?
@__jamiie If we all know Sony could never make an acquisition of those sizes, why are you comparing what they did? I'm repeating myself because you don't seem to the grasp the words on your screen - comparing what Microsoft did with how Sony operates is disingenuous.
I've already pointed out that Sony's acquisitions have seen plenty of multiformat releases. And even at that, those are from studios that were long nurtured by the company and were original IP, yet they're still popping up outside of the PlayStation ecosystem vs. Microsoft gobbling up masses of multiformat IP. Again, comparing the two is utterly disingenuous.
You've just shot yourself in the foot there too - Insomniac's Spider-Man never existed outside of the PlayStation ecosystem to begin with. So Sony acquiring them means nothing to your argument. And as the other dude already said to you, you're aware that Microsoft turned down the offer to make a Marvel/Spider-Man game themselves, right?
What part of "PlayStation isn't worth a hoot to Sony if they don't have the software to back it up" is so hard for you to understand?
Would love to see proof that Microsoft (Bethesda's new owners) were within their rights to rip those contracts up...
@MrPeanutbutterz You are talking about the beginning of an acquisition, I am talking about the output. Sony ties games to PlayStation or (only recently) PC and Switch.
Spider-Man is the IP. Spider-Man was multi-platform. The developer isn't the point when discussing the IP. If Insomniac closed tomorrow, Spider-Man games would still be developed in the future and would still be tied to PlayStation as a console exclusive.
When did I say that PlayStation don't have the software to back it up? I've owned every PlayStation since the beginning. Again, my point is that hardware will be irrelevant at some point and Microsoft will have the larger portfolio of games to offer. What don't you get?
Regarding the contracts, I'm not going to do all of your research for you. It's quite commonly known that new owners don't have to agree to anything if they don't want to. It can be requested they honour existing contracts but not enforced.
@__jamiie Sony ties (or at least tied) their acquisitions to their platform because that's how the industry operated since the beginning up until the last few years.
Who developed Spider-Man is entirely the point here - it was shopped to Microsoft and Sony, Microsoft shrugged their shoulders and walked away. But that's somehow Sony's fault now it's on PlayStation but not Xbox? Lol.
You didn't say that, but bleating "Sony are a hardware company" is contrary to the fact they're a videogame company and need to sell both hardware and software. What don't you get there, exactly?
It's not my research, you're the one making claims and being asked for proof. If it's quite commonly known then the proof should be easy to furnish. Once again, you have the mic and I'll wait...
@MrPeanutbutterz "Sony ties (or at least tied) their acquisitions to their platform because that's how the industry operated since the beginning up until the last few years."
This was a point I clearly made in my original post. Sony are suddenly realising that the industry has changed and they can't get away with locking software solely to their own hardware.
Sony bought a studio that had the rights to the Spider-Man IP. The Spider-Man IP was always multiplatform until beforehand. I'm not suggesting that Microsoft passing on Spider-Man was a good move at all. I'm suggesting that as a multi-platform IP, it should have stayed that way.
Sony ARE a hardware focussed company. PlayStation is a software focussed division but its parent (Sony) IS A HARDWARE COMPANY. I'm genuinely tired of trying to explain the difference to you.
Regarding the contracts, (AGAIN) buy a textbook, speak to a corporate lawyer or use Google to prove me wrong. I guarantee you won't be able to.
I own every PlayStation since they launched and every Xbox since they launched. I don't understand why you're SO obsessed with sticking up for one particular console.
Surely we play games for fun? Surely you would love a future where you could play any game you wanted without having to pick sides and cry about things?
Im curious, what are you really trying to say? @__jamiie
You say Sony buys studios and locks their games to their platform. So does Xbox.
You say Sony makes former multiplats exclusive, which we now have found out happens to be only one IP. Xbox has done the same, but with more IP.
At the end of the day, whats ur point?
@PuppetMaster I'm sorry I'm not seeing Legend of Dragoon here my one favorite RPG's ever. 😞
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...