No, usually when Sony acquires something - first the studio develops the exclusive game - and then Sony acquire it.
Like Bungie?
1 Like
Bungie is a very unusual case. It is literally the first (ok arguable Psygnosis was the first) case. I am fully expect that Sony bought Bungie because they had no choice and it was specifically done that way as Sony did not have leverage.
Many Sony studios were esteemed multiplatform devs before acquisition, it’s a recent Sony fanboys narrative that they were nurtured within PS structure.
2 Likes
Well, I am not sure but recent acquisitions were all - “make exclusive game” - “game is good” - acquire studio. Like Housemarque or Bluepoint. Basically they don’t owe any game debt to other publishers or studios.
Compare with Obsidian who had to finish The Outer Worlds, Double Fine who had to finish Psychonauts 2, even arguably Bethesda with time exclusives and so on. Inxile with Wasteland 3. I think also Ninja Theory was the same? Not sure.
Yeah, most Sony acquisitions were already contracted and in development of Sony games. It’d be like if MS acquired Certain Affinity, Asobo, or IOI.
That because Sony was an almost unstoppable force with ties everywhere in the industry in PS4 gen, Xbox was on the brink of death before 2018, so it’s clear most deals pre acquisition had PS ports in mind and more studios had exclusive relationships with Sony.
MS has to work hard for all this gen to undo all the damages dealt during X1 times, it’s no coincidence we still haven’t seen new games from 2018 acquisitions.
If they just wanted ABK for GP day 1 content, they coulda gotten that for a small fraction of the asking price. ABK offers them lots of things. On the consumer-facing side, yes GP day 1 is a HUGE get for the service as is the back catalogue that will be coming, plus some more indirect benefits we will get. But for MS, ABK gets them revenue streams from several of the industries biggest and most reliable IP’s. IP’s like CoD, Candy Crush and WoW are all super strong, reliable rev streams that have been consistently reliable for a decade or more straight. The more reliable rev streams MS has, the bigger bets it can take on other innovations for the company’s longer term vision. MS likes GP because it is a reliable, strong rev stream just like what CoD/WoW/CC offer. Even better that ABK content slots in to make GP even better.
The other poster is right about the Metaverse stuff too. When MS talks about how Amazon and Google and Apple and Facebook are their real competitors, that is the context they are making such statements in. A universe of consumer spending all happening within an ecosystem taht ultimately funnels down to MS (i.e. a reliable and growth-ripe rev stream opportunity). Facebook’s vision is (imho) super goofy and a bit out of touch. MS’s version of a Metaverse has nothing to do with VR headsets and more to do with using gaming as a broader social space. This is smart as gaming is becoming more mainstream every year and is wildly different in the role it plays in society than it was when MS first entered the console gaming business.
So Satya name dropping the Metaverse isn’t an off hand comment nor some throwaway line; it is genuinely important to MS’s future and ABK gives them some really important cards to leverage in that space.
1 Like
Javy is back? - me when I see someone respond to his post
Then I click it and see its a 2 week old post lol
1 Like
But that’s beside the point. Yes, I don’t argue why Microsoft bought them at all, I am just saying that why Sony’s acquisitions feel different - they usually complete an exclusive game for Sony and become free to develop the next, and Sony buys them.
The damage from Xbox One was enormous. We won’t recover for years (we are still in a recovery phase).
1 Like
I mean, Ninja Theory, Double Fine and Obsidian had old ties with Xbox, Undead and Playground were already 2nd party devs. The only outliers were inXile and Compulsion.
Yep, they are making more money than ever from gaming because gaming is bigger than ever, but the relative market position of 360 times is still ways off.
It is not about ties. I mean, Sony bought them when they did not have to finish any multiplatform game.
Yeah, that’s why I don’t buy into the argument that “they make more money than before, so they are succesful”. Market literally is bigger. If it were Xbox 360 right now regarding the market share, Microsoft would make the similar amount of money as Sony (not 2 times less) if not more.
Yeah, I know, most were like Undead and Playground, but not all, that is my point.
They needed to buy Zenimax and ABK to be roughly on par (~$80B), it only shows how deep was the pit dug by X1.
And even then they have to deal with regulators, bad public perception and so on. If not for deep pockets of Microsoft, they would be in so much trouble.
1 Like
It’s an highly competitive market and, let’s be honest, MS commitment had been inconsistent during the years and it shows. Hopefully it’s all in the past and from now on we’ll see only growth.
I would like to just point out something like this, yeah it would be cheaper to get all that content for just GP instead of buying the company but the thing is eventually they would spend the amount of money by keep topping up those deals that after awhile they could just buy the company outright instead.
My point is that if they want something in GP permanently then buying the company would be cheaper in the long run if the game is big, plus they lockdown IP from going to any other service.
Sensing some things not directly tied to acquisitions - Xbox One PTSD most certainly isn’t… and I think its damages have long since dissolved (outside of internet gossip at least).
5 Likes
You don’t spend tens of billions to only get the scraps of what you can possibly get, you make this kind of moves only if you want to literally buy marketshare.
I mean, it was related to the differenced between some of Sony/MS acquisitions. Also if you live outside NA, it’s far from fully mended. Market share is an unavoidable truth also.
Well, we technically can create a separate topic like “Xbox One PTSD | Pool of misery and complaints” and the same actors will post there every day 
All microsoft acquistions are directly related to (except Mojang 
) to IP ownership and exclusive games. So no matter what people say - ATVI deal will lead to exclusive games and some famous IP will also become exclusive (in some for or another).
That’s why strategically best acquisitions for Microsoft are the ones tied with IPs. In Japan nothing beats Capcom and Sega in that regard (Square Enix is not that for me at least). Sega gives them a mascot and elevates their media presence, Capcom gives a solid line-up of great IPs.