In genuinely worried about Sony buying Capcom as a response to MS' move. And then suddenly you've got no Capcom games on Switch or Xbox.
Daniel Ahmad (ZhugeEX) on the MS Xbox Live Gold situation: Gamepass biggest focus moving forward and MS looking to acquire IPs to bolster the service.
- Thread starter Marano
- Start date
- Status
I know Final Fantasy is seen as this massive franchise but that's mostly nostalgia goggles. Series like Assassins Creed and other massive multi platform releases show that multi platform is the way to go if you want your franchises to consistently sell 10+ million copies. All Square is doing with exclusivity deals with Sony is holding back the growth potential of their series. It's ridiculous they don't view it that way.That won't happen if exclusivity deals like this (supposedly) happen
Reddit - Dive into anything
www.reddit.com
I get FF isnt a niche product but if the big hitters avoid the platform then the niche ones will absolutely follow suit
Those are timed exclusivity deals, not full. Nioh is the only example I could think of what you mean but that's because SIE published the games outside of Japan and didn't want to publish them on Xbox or Switch (obviously).That won't happen if exclusivity deals like this (supposedly) happen
Reddit - Dive into anything
I get FF isnt a niche product but if the big hitters avoid the platform then the niche ones will absolutely follow suit
probably why MS will keep doubling down on acquisitions.That won't happen if exclusivity deals like this (supposedly) happen
Reddit - Dive into anything
I get FF isnt a niche product but if the big hitters avoid the platform then the niche ones will absolutely follow suit
Eh, Final Fantasy is still the best selling Series of Square Enix. FF7:RE was the best selling digital release of all time and it reached 5 Millions after a few months.
It already passed FFX and is only behind OG FF7 in revenue ( US only ). Final Fantasy is doing better than ever.
How many developers on console are not releasing games on PlayStation?
Nintendo? MS published games? Plenty japanese devs that only develope for Switch. In future we will have Bethesda games being XBOX only. There is plenty, actually.
I'm interested to see how this pans out. I mean obviously Tencent will win but I wonder how many publishers will have their own game pass equivalents by next gen.
So, they should buy anyone that develops games on any console that is not a PlayStation. PlayStation is where we draw the line when it comes to acquisitions? Is this because there is something special for people who choose to play on this platform, and this singular platform alone?
Going by your assessment, the only developers that Microsoft would have brought in, to not get on the wrong side of entitled PlayStation gamers would be Playground Games, Undead Labs and the opening of The Initiative.
People need to acclimate to playing games where they are offered, just like it has always been. People similarly need to stop coming up with narrow scope caveats on how businesses are spending their money, so that these consumers keep spending their money in a predetermined manner.
That's not gonna to happen because Bethesda will still publish on PC despite being owned by Xbox.
Sony's model has always been third party first. They pivoted a little with the PS4, but the fact that they had the fastest console at the cheapest price with the biggest selection of third party titles and strongest brand was a bigger factor than 1st party titles.
There's a huge amount of the market that buy PlayStations for a lot more than Sony's 1st party content which covers a relatively narrow scope of genres.
It wasn't really until this current generation that the IPs most closely associated with PlayStation were Sony's own IP. It's one of the reasons they struggled with the PS Classic so much as the properties that people associate with the console aren't Sony's IPs.
EH, where did i say that?
The user i quoted listed DEVs that Sony bought in the 2000s. All of which where already developing exclusively for Playstation. I noted that there is a difference between buying these DEVs, and buying a publisher that published game on multiple platforms ( including Playstation and Switch). That's all. I didn't say anything else.
Okay, i can change it to MS only.
Nothing argument. Everyone gets developers for talent, IP and in the rare case, tech. Every developer ever bought is third party before they are absorbed, even in the third party space.
As stated, people need to acclimate to getting games where they are offered instead of complaining that it is shitty.
Actually there's no difference, this is business at the end of the day.
Ready at Dawn made PS exclusive games for years, but this didn't stop Facebook from buying them after releasing successful VR titles; using this logic, then Oculus/FB shouldn't have bought RaD because they didn't have a long history with them? Same goes with Sanzaru Games.
Having history with a platform holder or publisher does not mean you are going to be tied to them until the end of your day and in some cases it might end up really bad, see Evolution Studios.
I'm sorry but i'm not letting you tell me what i should think is okay and what is not. If i think it's shitty, then i can think it's shitty. End of story.
If you can't see a difference between buying a DEV that ONLY has ties to your system and buying a Dev that developes for multiple system, then this discussion has no sense and i'll end it here.
The pissed off will will remain pissed off but that is such a small group. The rest will adapt and find a way to play the games. Whether it be PC, mobile, Xbox entry points or who knows Xcloud on tv's. Gamepass will blow up thanks to these acquisitions.
We can as well end the discussion here then, being tied to one publisher or platform does not mean you are going to stay with them until the end of the days and only the publisher should buy the developer and not someone else.
If you think it's shitty that's on you, people selling their studios know better than you lol.
I really don't think this service will scale like Netflix does. Netflix is there to just throw a show up when you're bored and want to relax, and most of their content is sub-par at best, especially their film division. I think the ideal for Game Pass going forward would be to make a lot of shorter AAA experiences with high quality rather than trying to put out a few huge IP titles every year.
Bizarre Creations was making games for Xbox and was swallowed by Activision.
BioWare had this deal with Microsoft for three games if I remember correctly, and before the first game was even out, EA had pounced.
Double Helix was making Killer Instinct one day and the next they were owned by Amazon.
DICE was making Xbox games, the next day they were owned by EA.
Angel Studios was making games for Xbox, and some time later they were acquired by Take 2.
Microsoft made a lot of dumb decisions in the past, and I for one am glad that they are being proactive when it comes to gaming. If some feel that it is shitty, so be it, no one ever got anywhere in the gaming industry by playing nice. Even Sony that is so often praised got to where they are by leveraging their financial strength as an electronics giant, buying a publisher, and securing exclusives that had appeared on other consoles prior.
Final Fantasy is doing better than ever compared to Final Fantasy. I'm comparing it to other big multiplatform AAA games like Assassins Creed or Elder Scrolls. Continuing to making exclusivity deals prevents FF from being on the scale of those games in regards to sales. Yeah FF7 Remake is the best selling FF game so far, but let's compare that games sales to Assassins Creed Valhalla which launched day and date on all platforms.
The server blades will become series x blades this year. During beta they were using one s blades for testing viability
Hate to break it to you but by your logic Bethesda were publishing on Xbox and Microsoft before they even wrote a line of port code for a Sony device so it's fine
But even if we aren't following that logic zenimax wanted out and MS wanted to preserve them so we get an entity that isn't split up and for the most part it's neat and tidy
Anyone's joy or upsettedness isn't going to change that
Or square has mismanaged their budgets really badly somewhere in the past and are taking these deals to stay in the black....
Xbox is not dictating whether Square's japanese games are profitable or not, they're 20% of the games LTD before PC ports.
I still remember what a big loss it was to Xbox and Nintendo when Sony bought all those studios. No more Syphon Filter, Killzone, Jak, Twisted Metal and SOCOM on Xbox.
If this is true, then Square is in some serious need of management restructuring.
I've said this before, but the only sales they are losing are people who would only buy on Xbox on day one. When they do a second release on Xbox they'll get a second wind. You're right that FF is not as big as Assassins Creed, but saying that they have to release multiplat on day one to grow their audience is nonsensical. All they have to do to grow their audience is sell the maximum number of copies possible, it doesn't matter whether they sell those copies on day 1 or day 500.
That won't happen if exclusivity deals like this (supposedly) happen
Reddit - Dive into anything
I get FF isnt a niche product but if the big hitters avoid the platform then the niche ones will absolutely follow suit
Heh I wonder how true this is. 7M for FFVII Remake is really good.
"It's sad that some franchises might go exclusive" is a different position than "it's sad that people buy studios instead of founding them and also Sony didn't acquire studios during their dominant gens".
The more they push gamepass the more I refuse to subscribe. An increase in the price of gold would have only worked if the value proposition of Gold was massively increased beyond just some extra old games a month.
In the meantime I'll continue to pay for gold and only gold.
In the meantime I'll continue to pay for gold and only gold.
Variety of content is key, not length of experience. Gamepass isn't reliant in just a few huge IPs every year. There are tons of gamesthat vary in size and score, from small independent titles to large blockbusters, and everything in between.
Last edited:
Could we not act like if Sony had the money to buy publishers they would not do it? They are pretty ruthless with their third party deals so I could totally see them purchasing pubs if they had the money.
This would grow the operating costs of GPU exponentially. Their goal isn't just "get everyone on Gamepass". They want to make money in the process.
Last edited:
It's a reach to assume this has anything to do with the sustainability of gamepass. They just wanted to make more money off of people who subscribed to gold.
They've been adding millions of people to gamepass every quarter simply by adding lots of good games to gamepass... my guess is they'll continue with that strategy, along with increasing the number of devices the cloud service is available on.
Could we not act like Sony doesn't have the money to buy publishers? They've got over 40 billion dollars in cash laying about. They can purchase most publishers out there if they want to.
Game pass is more than sustainable, they've even said so themselves many times in interviews. But this is the Netflix of gaming we are talking, you don't start such a service for 15-20 million users and then be happy with that, you have to be aggressive and you aim for 80-100 million users before the competition (That includes google and Amazon) gets a real foothold.
EA Play hasn't gone anywhere. It's still fully available on both Xbox and PlayStation, as well as Steam and Origin. EA Play Pro still exists.
I don't know if I'd call tomb raider a dead IP
Studios yeah
Publishers highly unlikely.
These deals don't grow on trees and neither does money. MS prolly has a hard time justifying 7 billion. Sony doesn't have the money to gamble like that without hurting their brand. Shareholders would be pissed. They're much much smaller than MS.
77 billion compared to 1 trillion makes these publisher deals way more possible for Microsoft. If Sony used 10% of their money buying zenimax they would be playing with fire. But they could live dangerously
Last edited:
Sony's cash on hand jumped by about 16 billion dollars in 1 year:
Sony Cash and Short Term Investments (Quarterly) | SNE
In depth view into Sony Cash and Short Term Investments (Quarterly) including historical data from 1972, charts, stats and industry comps.
ycharts.com
What makes you think investors would be up in arms if they chose to spend part of that to invest heavily into their most profitable division?
I'm by no means in tune with all aspects of what's required for such a massive acquisition, but I highly doubt most others here are either. We know Sony was ready to bid on a smaller publisher a few months ago with Leyou. Given how much cash they've got on hand I see no reason why they couldn't go after a mid sized publisher if they chose to. Now whether they will choose to or not is a completely different matter, but they most certainly have the capability and resources to do so.
Only time will tell what direction they go in their future acquisitions, I'm just sick of seeing the same tired nonsense that they don't have the resources to pull it off. Hell, just a few months ago AMD, a company with a roughly similar market cap to Sony and FAR FAR less cash on hand announced a 35 billion dollar acquisition of Xilinx. Why in the blue hell does anyone think Sony would be unable to spend 10 billion on a publisher? It's either ignorance or console warrior nonsense IMO.
It's very compicated. Sony is in better shape than 2004 and back then they were ready to spend more than 4B USD for MGM. In this fiscal year they spend 3.7B for their Financial unit which is expected to bring around 400-500M USD net profit each year. The company has around 128B USD Market Cap and more than 40B USD Cash on Hand. Probably they will end the fiscal year between 45B and 48B USD. It is very important that they have very small long term debt (around 7B USD). Microsoft for example has more than 50B USD debt.
They can definitely pay in cash, stocks and take a debt.... if it is worthy. Also, Sony Corp has assets that might be sold one day. Their 34% stake in M3 Inc is worth way north of 20B USD. There is always a possibility that they will sell Sony Pictures without some assets (FUNimation Anime Group for example).
A verified user already said that they are looking for IPs that can be used in both gaming and picture. At this point only some insiders know what Sony plans are.
I honestly don't believe those organic growth PR bla-bla from Jim Ryan.
Gaming is the biggest revenue business for Sony. If they think that they are going to lose a good amount of market share and that this is linked to acquisitions being made elsewhere, you will see them making investments.
I mean, yes, they clearly thought $60 is not a sustainable business strategy in 2020, so they changed it.
Well to be fair Jim Ryan did say organic growth and select acquisitions. I have no doubt we'll see new studios formed and more of their existing studios transitioned into 2 team or 1.5 team studios. Not to mention getting more people in those studios so games can be pumped out faster.
Sony may or may not go after a publisher at some point, but even if they do they can't really say anything about it until negotiations are much further along. I still say it makes the most sense for them to go for Capcom to use their IP for games as well as tv shows and movies. Square would be the next best option.
It's a good thing for Bethesda and their studios, as well as their games (security and funding). This is what Bethesda wanted
Looking at the history of acquisitions for Sony tells a different story.
It shows a demonstrated, long standing history of collaborations on projects.
Their studio acquisition history doesn't demonstrate anything to support that they just want to acquire publishers.
I guess it depends on how you define those collaborations. I get the impression that Microsoft aren't exactly strangers to the Bethesda guys.
Either way, it's all business. People like to paint one relationship as a collaboration or friendship, but really it's just business through the lens of video game fans looking to pick at other video game fans.
If Game Pass is trying to model itself after Netflix then yeah, it requires huge investment in IP. Netflix spends significantly more than every other streaming service. This is how they jumped ahead. I don't think the two are directly comparable but there's some similarities between them.
And yet they were prepared to bid on a smaller publisher just recently that they have no significant past relationship with (Leyou). I think at this point no one can predict what Sony's intentions are, and we can't go solely based on past behavior when trying to guess at the future. They've got a CEO who seems happy to toss money around at acquisitions and new leadership for SIE. We have no idea what they'll do to be quite honest.
It's more than just business, though. That's too surface level.
The working relationship between Bethesda and MS is not really the same as actively collaborating on multiple projects.
- Status