Microsoft to buy Activision Blizzard

Been watching them mismanage all the Blizzard IP's for years so I'm pretty excited to see what happens moving forward.
 
Zorachus said:
Please bring World of Warcraft back to it's glory days with 10.0 and the next expansion.

But seriously, how will this effect WoW short-term and long-term?
Click to expand...

I do not believe that will happen, I think the wow team has just had too much brain drain over the last few years on top of all the other harassment issues. I dont think there are enough people there currently to even make a barebones patch, much less a hit it out of the park expansion. It is pretty obvious that shadowlands has already been abandoned WoD style with most of its planned content cut. I dont see how they can get a new expansion out even in the next 2 years, much less make a good one. Heck I am doubtful they will even be able to release WotLK classic at this point.
 
SeymourGore said:
Latest rumblings are that Kotick *will* be leaving once the merger is complete. Smart move and would probably alleviate alot of the drama going on at Activision Blizzard. Deserving or not, Kotick's become the 'face' of the scandal there.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/b...osofts-deal-goes-through-report/1100-6499731/
Click to expand...

Yeah I think even kotick knows he is seeing the dying throes of the golden goose he milked to get every ounce of gold out of. He will leave on his golden parachute and sleep on his big pile of gold, without a care for what becomes of his former company. He gets out without having to really deal with any of the issues he caused, either on purpose or by greed and neglect.
 
Starfalcon said:
I do not believe that will happen, I think the wow team has just had too much brain drain over the last few years on top of all the other harassment issues. I dont think there are enough people there currently to even make a barebones patch, much less a hit it out of the park expansion. It is pretty obvious that shadowlands has already been abandoned WoD style with most of its planned content cut. I dont see how they can get a new expansion out even in the next 2 years, much less make a good one. Heck I am doubtful they will even be able to release WotLK classic at this point.
Click to expand...
I mean I don't know how they planned to end Shadowlands but where do you go from there? Simply from a shitty story progression point, they have enough room in there for a book or two but certainly not enough of a space for an expansion to support them. This would be a good place to launch a full reboot, they could literally end this expansion with their equivalent of a big bang. Worlds of Warcraft.
 
Bloomberg reported Bobby is going to get $375M when the deal closes. I bet he will leave after that.
 
Lakados said:
This would be a good place to launch a full reboot, they could literally end this expansion with their equivalent of a big bang. Worlds of Warcraft.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'd be okay with that - so much bloat with the current game.
 
thedream829 said:
Hopefully some new StarCraft games.
Click to expand...
As much as I love Starcraft for what it is. Its a universe that could be turned into multiple interesting games.
I'm sure Microsoft will mostly mess things up... hopefully they green light a bunch of stuff.
 
I dont even think they quite knew where SL was going to go beside a rough story, and they ended up cutting a lot of it to tie up the end quickly. Where if they had good planning they could have used SL as a launch pad for more expansions and flesh it out a lot more, instead of having a half cooked expansion abandoned 1/3rd through the expansion with so much waste.

It was like they could have used the content from legion like the weapons and brought them forward and kept adding and improving them, instead of tossing them in the bin like they do with 95% of the things they do every expansion. Instead they do stupid things like the mission table and world quests that they just cut and paste, because they run out of time after reinventing the wheel every expansion.
 
Armenius said:
The only source I can find on the $13B figure was this, and it doesn't provide a source for that number.
https://techjury.net/blog/gaming-industry-worth/

The number I could find was shown in Sony's financial reports that SIE's gross revenue in 2020 was $25B, and their operating income was $3.2B.

FIFA is EA. Warzone is Activision's cash cow, making around $5M a day.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/esports/how-much-money-did-warzone-make-in-2021/ar-AARRa5r
Click to expand...
Ive been playing Warzone with my buddy and am CONSTANTLY assaulted by "you could have this skin if you buy the battle pass!" popups.
 
WorldExclusive said:
Wow, some good news in gaming. It's been a while.
Click to expand...
That depends on how you look at it. From the immediate perspective this would be a good thing since Activation Blizzard has more people that hate them than love them. Microsoft will absolutely fund the living shit out of their games, but this comes at a cost. The whole point is to get gamers onto the Xbox platform. That means for the near future that new Call of Duty games won't be on Playstation. At some point Mac OSX ports of World of Warcraft will end since it's also not Xbox. Future World of Warcraft ports will be made to work on gamepads, which you can take that what you will but again Xbox. Linux gaming will have an impossible time installing these games as at some point they'll be exclusive to the Xbox GamePass store. Or at least getting Linux gamers banned for finding creative ways to install games off GamePass.

To me it seems that Microsoft is pulling a Disney and just buying as much IP as they can to feed their Xbox platform. This won't always include PC as I believe the union of Windows PC and Xbox is temporary until Microsoft brings Xbox back to the forefront of gaming. Once that's achieved we'll be left behind... again.
 
ChadD said:
As much as I love Starcraft for what it is. Its a universe that could be turned into multiple interesting games.
I'm sure Microsoft will mostly mess things up... hopefully they green light a bunch of stuff.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping they make an FPS game that has a single player campaign.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
For a company with $2.2B net incomes that seems highly overvalued.

Depending on the interest rate, a $2.2B perpetuity provides way less than $69B.

The payback on that investment is WAY too long.

Are they smoking crack, or do they see some synergies from this deal that are lost on me, like maybe what they can do with the titles to promote game pass or the Windows Store or something like that?
 
Last edited:
My guesses:
Call of Duty: Azeroth

Diablo IV DLC character class: DOOM SLAYER

The Outer Starcraft Worlds: Episode Kerrigan

Tony Hawk with a Minecraft level creator. (Honestly, that would be pretty fucking rad.)

Forza and Kazooie

New Overwatch Character: THE COOOOOOOOOOOOLE TRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIN

“Dunwall”
Infinity Ward makes a F2P Battle Royale based on the world of Dishonored.

World of Warcraft 2 is announced and Obsidian is a co-studio to help with development. It never releases.
 
TheSlySyl said:
My guesses:
Call of Duty: Azeroth

Diablo IV DLC character class: DOOM SLAYER

The Outer Starcraft Worlds: Episode Kerrigan

Tony Hawk with a Minecraft level creator. (Honestly, that would be pretty fucking rad.)

Forza and Kazooie

New Overwatch Character: THE COOOOOOOOOOOOLE TRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIN

“Dunwall”
Infinity Ward makes a F2P Battle Royale based on the world of Dishonored.

World of Warcraft 2 is announced and Obsidian is a co-studio to help with development. It never releases.
Click to expand...

Call of Halo
 
I have thought about this and am a bit conflicted. I'm not sure this will lead to anything positive. On the flip side I'm not seeing much loss.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
For a company with $2.2B net incomes that seems highly overvalued.

Depending on the interest rate, a $2.2B perpetuity provides way less than $69B.

The payback on that investment is WAY too long.

Are they smoking crack, or do they see some synergies ok this deal that are lost on me, like maybe what they can do with the titles to promote game pass or the Windows Store or something like that?
Click to expand...
Yeah. Call of duty only on Xbox, game pass, and Windows store.
 
Since we're all weighing in:
My hope is that Microsoft will choose to go agnostic and full capitalist.

In other words try to move to a model like Steam, and sell to everyone, rather than go exclusive. I doubt they'll go this route though. They'd rather be monopolistic. Although I'd bet they'd make more money by being a vendor and a store front if they decided to sell to everyone. Make Xbox the "brand" instead of Windows. And then sell "Xbox" to "Windows", Playstation, macOS, whatever.

It doesn't affect me much either way. Because of Activision, Blizzard was already ceasing development on macOS for basically all future titles. There was already going to be no support on macOS for Diablo 4, likely the only game I really cared about. idSoftware similarly after being sold to Bethesda and then Zenimax also stopped supporting Linux/macOS. So, Microsoft getting all these corps now hasn't really changed the direction that they were all headed anyway. I don't own any consoles, so Xbox vs Playstation doesn't matter too much to me. Although I have long considered getting a PS5, once they eventually come out with a "mini" version, and also if and when they're actually available.

The only "difference" now will be that hopefully these devs won't produce complete trash titles like they have been. As basically every one of the franchises that are associated with these brands has been run into the ground. There are exceptions like Doom 2016 and Overwatch. But against popular opinion, the Elder Scrolls series has sucked. Fallout isn't Fallout. Most Activision titles have been played out. And Blizzards IPs have been run into the ground slowly over the course of 10 years. The only way things can get better from here is essentially if internal policies for these companies get better. Quality over quantity (yearly cycles) gets emphasized. And legacy of IPs gets valued over profits (which was Blizzards model, which I might add still leads to massive profits - just not short term ones. However, you can sell a classic game forever. A yearly released one won't last more than 8 months).

My voice is one that doesn't really count for much though, since I'm not really a gamer anymore. Although I would probably play games more often if what I wanted to play was on more alternative OS's. Maybe it will be Valve that changes things. Until then the devs that have been making titles I really care about like Larian Studios are already multi-platform. There is a small modicum of hope that CDProjekt Red will go back to being multi-platform (the Witcher 1/2 was, but 3 and Cyberpunk 2077 are not). And I've been enjoying the titles released by Square-Enix like Tomb Raider and DX:MD, which were all multi-platform releases.
 
TheGardenTool said:
UnknownSouljer without quoting that wall of text, Microsoft is hoping you’ll be the perfect customer for a Gamepass Ultimate subscription so you’ll pay monthly fees to be able to stream the games you can’t natively play.
Click to expand...
Yep, its all going streaming. Prices will remain high on PC components for the foreseeable future and people will slowly start to walk away from building high dollar PC's.
 
The only thing I really hope for out of this is that Microsoft splits Activision and Blizzard so their branding isn't mish mashed together. Maybe a Blizzard exclusive launcher or, better yet, Blizzard games on other platforms.
 
Toboggan said:
The only thing I really hope for out of this is that Microsoft splits Activision and Blizzard so their branding isn't mish mashed together. Maybe a Blizzard exclusive launcher or, better yet, Blizzard games on other platforms.
Click to expand...
Be prepared for Battle.net to host everything.
 
Zarathustra[H] said:
For a company with $2.2B net incomes that seems highly overvalued.

Depending on the interest rate, a $2.2B perpetuity provides way less than $69B.

The payback on that investment is WAY too long.

Are they smoking crack, or do they see some synergies ok this deal that are lost on me, like maybe what they can do with the titles to promote game pass or the Windows Store or something like that?
Click to expand...

Is isn't it sort of obvious. Microsoft is going to try and put the Playstation down.
I'm not saying they will... but they have a better chance of pulling that off today then they did yesterday.

Starfield exclusive, Elder Scrolls 6... almost for sure exclusive. Now add on the next Call of duty after the next one... a house cleaning at blizzards and a relaunch of Overwatch as Overwatch 2 (xbox exclusive) Diablo 4 is scheduled for 2023, expect them to drop the PS4. Tony Hawk... exclusives. Crash Bandicoot and Spyro exclusives (hey even consoles need some good kid stuff).

I also find it hard to understand 70 billion for EA... but for that price people thinking Microsoft is just planning to let EA function as they have been and produce all their content for Sony are dreaming. This isn't as much about Microsoft buying EA as how much content Sony just got locked out of in 2023 and beyond.
 
UnknownSouljer said:
Since we're all weighing in:
My hope is that Microsoft will choose to go agnostic and full capitalist.

In other words try to move to a model like Steam, and sell to everyone, rather than go exclusive. I doubt they'll go this route though. They'd rather be monopolistic. Although I'd bet they'd make more money by being a vendor and a store front if they decided to sell to everyone. Make Xbox the "brand" instead of Windows. And then sell "Xbox" to "Windows", Playstation, macOS, whatever.
Click to expand...
The most capitalist thing to do is be exclusive. They make more money from selling other peoples games than selling their own games. This is why Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are pushing for exclusives because they know you won't buy a console without them. This is also why on PC you have a launcher from every game company because nobody wants to lose 30% of their sales for the privilege to have their games on certain platforms.
The only "difference" now will be that hopefully these devs won't produce complete trash titles like they have been. As basically every one of the franchises that are associated with these brands has been run into the ground. There are exceptions like Doom 2016 and Overwatch. But against popular opinion, the Elder Scrolls series has sucked. Fallout isn't Fallout. Most Activision titles have been played out. And Blizzards IPs have been run into the ground slowly over the course of 10 years. The only way things can get better from here is essentially if internal policies for these companies get better. Quality over quantity (yearly cycles) gets emphasized. And legacy of IPs gets valued over profits (which was Blizzards model, which I might add still leads to massive profits - just not short term ones. However, you can sell a classic game forever. A yearly released one won't last more than 8 months).
Click to expand...
My hope is that Microsoft does a Sony and future titles don't have micro-transactions and very limited DLC. This is something you see in all Sony exclusives in that they don't do dirty tactics to make extra cash. A lot of these companies are losing customers because they care more about immediate returns rather than long term customers. Blizzard thought they had the most loyal customers but after a while their customers hate them now.

My opinion on the games you listed is this. Elder Scrolls has been awesome and most people agree with me. Fallout 4 was a fine game but obviously lacked morality choices that you got with older Fallout games. This is probably due to time and lack of funding. Most Activision games are not just Call of Duty. Blizzard games can be salvaged easily with the right person directing them. How many fans that don't play WoW are still fans of the game? Enough that quality machinima is still created to this day.


Krenum said:
Yep, its all going streaming. Prices will remain high on PC components for the foreseeable future and people will slowly start to walk away from building high dollar PC's.
Click to expand...
High dollar PC's weren't the mainstream of PC gaming. Steam's hardware survey shows that people still use sub $300 graphic cards from 2016 in 2022. I don't now when prices will come down but this does create an opportunity for some other party to come in and shack things up with more competition. Someone besides Intel will enter the GPU market at some point. In the mean time people will just hold onto their old hardware. Even console users aren't giving up Playstation 4's as the prices are still high for what is a discontinued product. As discontinued as one can be when a successor is released.
 
Last edited:
TheGardenTool said:
UnknownSouljer without quoting that wall of text, Microsoft is hoping you’ll be the perfect customer for a Gamepass Ultimate subscription so you’ll pay monthly fees to be able to stream the games you can’t natively play.
Click to expand...
This is dependent on excellent internet access. And although I have "okay" service - for the time being - this isn't a great option for me because of this reason (I've tested out Google's stream service as well as Amazon's just to check it out). Also it would be a waste of money. I play on average 2 games a year. Maybe. It would be the equivalent of paying for a gym pass and never going to the gym.
DukenukemX said:
The most capitalist thing to do is be exclusive.
Click to expand...
The most capitalistic thing to do is make the maximum amount of money. There are multiple theories on this. Suffice it to say that I would go with all theories that leave the maximum amount of parties happy. Because the intangible happyness is what creates repeat customers and good will. That's the frenzy behind the Witcher 3 and CP2077. Which obviously CP2077 tarnished.
DukenukemX said:
They make more money from selling other peoples games than selling their own games.
Click to expand...
Sure. Apple literally makes no games and makes more money from gaming than than Xbox, Playstation, and Nintendo combined. We've had that conversation though. The iPhone is a greater money making 'console' than consoles.
DukenukemX said:
This is why Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are pushing for exclusives because they know you won't buy a console without them.
Click to expand...
Yes and no. Sony as an example is starting to reverse its stance. It's recognizing by selling to PC as well as Playstation all it does is increase sales. The purpose of console platform exclusivity was to buy into a given platform at the cost of others. But it also turns out that if you sell on multiple platforms you make more money period.
If that wasn't the case then CoD as an example would only sell on one platform and be exclusive. But it's obvious that selling CoD on Playstation, XBox, and PC just triples the platforms its on and therefore gives that much more opportunity to sell more copies. In fact considering the cost of multi-platform development vs the cost of making entirely new games, it's fiscally stupid to only produce your titles on one platform. Only first parties try to enforce this. Every third party does not. For exactly the reasons I'm referring to.

Although I don't see consoles ending soon (despite the PCMR saying differently because there will always be gamers that are less technically literate), as consoles become more PC-ified, I only see multi-platform titles increasing, not decreasing. And with consoles like the Steam deck - console gaming turning into essentially PC gaming will only become more prevalent. In fact, it may be Valve through the Steam Deck that erodes the stranglehold of consoles and forces their hand to go multiplatform. Especially if it ever gets to the point that there are more Steam Deck consoles than say Nintendo Switches, then you'll know exclusivity is a short trip to cruise for a bruising.
DukenukemX said:
This is also why on PC you have a launcher from every game company because nobody wants to lose 30% of their sales for the privilege to have their games on certain platforms.
Click to expand...
Also not true. Steam has given way more small devs a platform than would ever be possible than if they tried to make their own launcher - frankly for a small dev the cost of servers and bandwidth would far exceed Steams 30% cut. And that is ignoring all of the other free services such as financial transaction systems and support as well as nearly perfect uptime. Despite devs complaining about 30% taxation to list a game, that also still hasn't stopped any producer like CDPR from listing their titles on every platform (despite also owning GoG). Probably because quite frankly it's far more fair than they'd like to admit. Especially versus where gaming came from - physical copies and distribution.
Only the behemoths have their own launchers - and even they still cross list unless they are stubborn like EA with Origin. All of the ones who want to make money (like again CDPR, heck even Epic) still list on everything.
Larian like I mentioned before, probably the dev making the games I care about the most has no launcher. And they're making a fairly high-profile game in Balduar's Gate 3.

Anyway, the point is: more money is made by placing product everywhere, rather than on one platform. The IP has to be so desirable at this point to hold that halo of exclusivity power. And like I mentioned with Sony above with that GoW example, even that is getting eroded away (even Sony is on Steam, lol). It's foolish to not at MINIMUM have your titles on console and PC. Otherwise you're just leaving money on the table.
DukenukemX said:
My hope is that Microsoft does a Sony and future titles don't have micro-transactions and very limited DLC. This is something you see in all Sony exclusives in that they don't do dirty tactics to make extra cash. A lot of these companies are losing customers because they care more about immediate returns rather than long term customers. Blizzard thought they had the most loyal customers but after a while their customers hate them now.
Click to expand...
Right. Which is all to my point. Goodwill only extends as long as things are good.
DukenukemX said:
My opinion on the games you listed is this. Elder Scrolls has been awesome and most people agree with me. Fallout 4 was a fine game but obviously lacked morality choices that you got with older Fallout games. This is probably due to time and lack of funding.
Click to expand...
Cool - opinions. Like I said, I already know most people disagree with me. What's the count on Skyrim? Ported to at least 10 different platforms/editions? It's a flaming turd that apparently the masses can't get enough of.
DukenukemX said:
Most Activision games are not just Call of Duty.
Click to expand...
It's hilarious you say that. If you go to Activision's game section I count no less than 15 CoD games listed. If you count most as being 50% or above, then you're right. But it's certainly more than any other and at this point definitely what Activision is known for.
DukenukemX said:
Blizzard games can be salvaged easily with the right person directing them. How many fans that don't play WoW are still fans of the game? Enough that quality machinima is still created to this day.
Click to expand...
Great? You're just expressing fandom. People liking the idea of something and not actually even liking that thing. You've just described every 15 year old wearing a Pink Floyd or Nirvana shirt. By your definition "I like Star Wars" despite thinking that there hasn't been a good Star Wars film since 1983.
Despite this, I do agree with you that basically all titles are dependent on who is at the helm and how much money/time there is to develop it. There are tons of internal problems at Activision Blizzard. I think they can right the ship, but I also don't think that will be a short process. Blizzard actually has the best chance as they were at least some-what allowed to have long development times. D4 as an example is expected to still take another 2-3 years before launch. And their Diablo mobile game still hasn't launched. So some of their ethos is still there. However their creative teams are exahausted and/or destroyed. Management is rotted from the inside out. And all of their good will is done.
 
Last edited:
DukenukemX said:
The most capitalist thing to do is be exclusive. They make more money from selling other peoples games than selling their own games. This is why Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft are pushing for exclusives because they know you won't buy a console without them. This is also why on PC you have a launcher from every game company because nobody wants to lose 30% of their sales for the privilege to have their games on certain platforms.
Click to expand...
Counterpoint: What's 30% of $0?

Steams is large enough a storefront where if you don't list on it, you are directly affecting sales. So while you may make more per sale on some other storefront, you are also making less sales overall.

I like Steam because almost everything is on it, things are integrated well, and frankly I'm done managing multiple storefronts. I haven't purchased a thing from EA since they went with Origin, I haven't purchased from Ubi since Uplay, and I haven't purchased anything currently an EGS exclusive. And since I easily purchase close to a hundred games per year, that's a lot of money those companies are "not" getting.
 
I guess one of the first things to happen will be Overwatch loot box intergration with PC and XSX.

I also wouldn't be too surprised if Sony starts looking around for spare cash to try and buy EA. And maybe moves their HQ out of California, and welcomes back all the R rated titles they scared off to the Switch and PC due to large amounts of censorship.
 
UnknownSouljer said:
Since we're all weighing in:
My hope is that Microsoft will choose to go agnostic and full capitalist.
Click to expand...
Microsoft has gone full Corporatist, and has been a multi-trillion USD megacorp for a while now.
Gobbling up largecorps is mearly a pastime for Microsoft at this point.

Microsoft absorbing Activision Blizzard for nearly $70 billion USD is not going to be any better than NVIDIA absorbing ARM Holdings for $40 billion USD - in fact, it will probably be far worse.
Capitalism breeds innovation and competition - you know, the exact opposite that Microsoft is doing by quashing innovation and removing all competition the Corporatist way.

The last time Microsoft was a Capitalist company was in the 1980s.
Nice thought, but it is never going to happen in the 2020s.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top