ABK gives them big IPs, live service, recurring revenue, engagement, etc. in spades, Blizzard have two new IP/franchises coming and when they make new stuff, it’s usually big stuff and guaranteed to be in the live service model with huge revenues.
Thier next acquisitions don’t have to prioritize those aspects. I hope they target more devs/pubs with higher single-player focus than MP/live service, like Bethesda and the independent studios from 2018/19. Capcom would be the perfect one there.
Tried to break up some of the monotony with entirely unrealistic dreaming.
Capcom is an absolutely beautiful acquisition 
The monotony is unrealistic dreaming in this thread though
yeah, if Sony was going to acquire them they wouldn’t be selling control as it would hurt their value. I could see the argument when it was just SE West granted it was still iffy but this made me completely disregard an acquisition for the time being
Capcom also gives a good spread of genres with a lot of them being the face of that specific genre like they have street figher for fighters, ace attorney for visual novels, DMC for hack and slashes, resident evil for horror and then going into other genres they have megaman for platformers, they have capcom arcade for classic arcadey games, we have monster hunter for an action game and a bunch of others. They would be a great pick up but I wouldn’t be shocked if MS wants more live service content tbh
Why ? It’s a business. Microsoft is one of the biggest company in the world. Do you really think they’re going to give up on making more money or taking more market share? Microsoft’s goal is to make its service essential, and I think that goes well before exclusives or diversity of content. So I’m not saying that Microsoft won’t buy another Bethesda-scale publisher, one doesn’t preclude the other, but looking at the market, it’s hard to deny that EA would be a real gold mine for Microsoft, and the ideal publisher (post ABK) to impose the GP as a must-have service for a lot of casual gamers. We clearly should not underestimate the importance of sports games (or even racing) in the service, it would be a real lever for the GP and easy money for Microsoft (because it remains a priority). So I clearly don’t see them sleeping behind the wheel for this type of company.
SE West was not that attractive asset for SE (for various reasons) so they decided to become more lean and streamlined in their japanese part - publishing for western parts only, but all the studios and everything else in Japan.
Nobody underestimates the importance of the sports game, but they whole poinnt is not owning sporting licenses. As the example of what happens when you don’t own the license just look at MLB.
But that’s only one level, I was trying to go deeper, into level two…
How would that be a problem? These games are already available in EA Play Pro. Having them D1 in the GP would boost the number of subscriptions. You don’t need to make them exclusive.
Dear god, you are going to far…
We need more actual discussion not less…
You were the chosen one… you were supposed to help wring in the madness not loose it.
Why would Microsoft want to develop a huge chunk of multiplatform games that will go to other services (albeit the ones they might own)? EA Play in GP is an attractive option for Microsoft, but owning EA Play is not because you not only compete with yourself but dillute your own offerings (imagine supporting EA Play on Playstation and basically releasing all EA (that you produce lol) games on Playstation too).
And if Luna or Apple Arcade will offer enough money to leagues, they will easily ask Microsoft to develop the games for other platforms, making Microsoft third party publisher.
All the moves that Microsoft is doing are all about making exclusive content that does not appear anywhere else. They are not coming after the money from other platforms, but they are coming after exclusive streaming content.
See, that’s where it feels like this should realistically be a dead topic. I don’t know what more can be said that hasn’t been said multiple times already. Nothing has drastically changed in the landscape to spurn continual discussion.
Because they generate billions every year. Why do you want to keep EA Play if you buy EA? You place the games in your service and continue to market them at 70 dollars on other mediums, exactly as it will be with COD ( anyway you don’t have D1 games on EA Play).
Not really, they’ve clearly bought ABK for COD and King which are huge revenue generators and won’t be exclusives. Minecraft continues to release on other platforms nearly 10 years after the acquisition. Your argument is not correct and goes against Microsoft’s recent statements. In addition you totally neglect the exclusive content that would still come with EA.
While i agree let people have their fun and not spiral this place more into chaos…
Back on topic…
Ms buy Arksys, Gears for breakfast, Hare brained schemes
Microsoft literally earn more without Xbox. I always find it strange that Microsoft is one company that should be concerned about earning more money. Like, all the time, “losing money on the table”, “generate a lot of revenue from other platforms” and so on.
The whole Microsoft history they were all about make the competitor bleed more than them by leveraging MS specific revenue streams in other areas. If ABK did not think that they would lose much from Xbox consoles and other publishers they do not release game on Xbox - despite being extremely small - Micrsooft does not think that either.
They would have cancelled EA Play service probably - at least they would fullfill the obligations to the subscribers and platform holders (like who knows who long EA Play contracts are on Playstation platform).
The whole point of COD was to get it exclusively in Game Pass and King was their foothold in a market where they have close to zero presence.
Minecraft is essentially the same game that it was when Microsoft acquired them - literally the same platform. Like GTA5 being the same game since the moment they introduced online play. Same with Warzone.
Because most of the content that can be exclusive to Microsoft platforms is something they already own - racing games, RPGs (Bioware is a corpse at this point), FPS etc. (I know some people believe in “FPS monopoly” or “RPG monopoly” but that’s beside the point). The only exception that might be important is Sims, but it is hard to say what’s going on there with Sims 4 support and a potentially new Sims game.
So your argument here is that Microsoft doesn’t need/want to make more money?
Indeed, we do not know the obligations towards Playstation, and in any case EA Play does not bring D1 games to PS, so it would not change anything for the GP. Microsoft could very well release ME, DA, Dead Space, etc. with XGP to make them exclusive.
So Minecraft Dungeons and Minecraft Legends don’t exist?
You’re too entrenched in that checkbox mindset. You voluntarily forget genres (horror, action/adventure, cooperation, simulation, management) that you gladly push for other publishers. Bioware may be a corpse in your eyes but still manages to pique the interest of many gamers. Also, Microsoft doesn’t really have a third-person RPG like Mass Effect or a tactical RPG like Dragon Age. You push for the JRPG, but tend to put all Western RPGs in the same box, yet there are many differences between these different games. As for the Sims, it fits perfectly with the metaverse and there is a huge community behind this license.
What I say that Microsoft does not need money more than Sony, yet for some reason every time Microsoft is one the needs Playstation to get money. Not vice versa.
EA Play Pro does though
These games (and Ori) have always been a very sore point in discussion regarding Microsoft (and why I don’t like Mojang). They literally created an expectation regarding Microsoft and their multiplatform releases. I do remember that somebody explained why Minecraft got PSVR version though (crazy).
But the point is that platform-games will stay multiplatform. Albeit with some perks in GP, but even there Mojang is a disappointment(?) as Xbox literally has no exclusive perks on Xbox.
Because Microsoft literally has not a single exclusive JRPG these days (aside Octopath probably?). It is a gaping hole at this point (and a hilarious topic in various communities). And Microsoft is not a position where it can lose WRPGs, which is not the case for JRPGs.
No, I advocate for diversity and when you look at Microsoft’s moves they fit the certain patterns and that’s why I am saying that Capcom is their next best acquisition (now, whether it happens or not, we will see).
Horror - they can make one if necessary, Action/Adventure (debatable), Cooperation (co-op? They literally own tons of games like this), simulation (racing, flying, strategies?), management (?).
There are lot of genres that do not require acquisition (and Microsoft does not buy to own genres in the first place though).
The issue with Microsoft acquiring a publisher such as EA or Take Two is that it’s most likely going to require a lot more paperwork and take much longer than the ABK deal due to all the sports licensing. It would also be heavily more scrutinized by the FTC and other governments as well since by then Microsoft will already have Activision/Blizzard/King.
Which is something I don’t see Microsoft really going for if it means that they have to halter other acquisitions for an extended period of time since Microsoft is also a tech company as well.
yeah I agree. If I was MS I would lock up EA and T2 as soon as possible since it locks in the casuals and a lot of their games have microtransactions which is another source of revenue after every monthly payment but we don’t know what MS will priories. I would like capcom though
I mean, I don’t see any other oppitunities that would match or beat the power of EA or T2 unless fucking Nintendo fell in their lap so I have to strongly disagree here