Xbox Acquisition |OT6| If this is about competition, let us have competition

[TheBrightestSun]

@anon98342452

I can’t stand reading that these talented humans that make games are equated to “assets”, and even worse that they’re somehow less valuable than IP

It is what it is. Single IP without anything can cost 1b+, while a whole studio of people with no IPs will cost less than 100m.

[anon98342452]

@TheBrightestSun

It is what it is. Single IP without anything can cost 1b+, while a whole studio of people with no IPs will cost less than 100m.

What a gross thing to say. I don’t care what a capitalist market suggests about value. I care that as a person who has no vested interest outside of playing games, people are the most valuable thing.

[Terrin]

@anon98342452

What a gross thing to say. I don’t care what a capitalist market suggests about value. I care that as a person who has no vested interest outside of playing games, people are the most valuable thing.

It’s not that they are not valuable or talented. Buying a studio that has zero assets is a massive gamble… for the sake what’s keeping the employees there. As you won’t be able to sign everyone to a non compete clause Best example is BioWare once bought by ea a bunch of finished mass effect 2 and left then most of the studio heads left after there .non compete clause ended. Why mass effect 3 and the following games didn’t seem the same.

[anon98342452]

@Terrin

It’s not that they are not valuable or talented. Buying a studio that has zero assets is a massive gamble… for the sake what’s keeping the employees there. As you won’t be able to sign everyone to a non compete clause Best example is BioWare once bought by ea a bunch of finished mass effect 2 and left then most of the studio heads left after there .non compete clause ended. Why mass effect 3 and the following games didn’t seem the same.

I understand the concept. I still think it’s a dismissive and horrible thing to say or believe.

[No-1HoloLens-Fan]

@TheBrightestSun

It is what it is. Single IP without anything can cost 1b+, while a whole studio of people with no IPs will cost less than 100m.

A studio without IP is only worth

1. its pay roll and in some cases

2. premium for top end devs (which again is dependent on the individual capabilities) or

3. retention money for the stuff with bonds and such.

4. Other thing which could be important is the name of the studio itself which if highly popular could be a brand in itself

This is not at all insulting as well.

[pg2g]

@anon98342452

What a gross thing to say. I don’t care what a capitalist market suggests about value. I care that as a person who has no vested interest outside of playing games, people are the most valuable thing.

Perhaps this is not the thread for you then

[BadNews]

@No-1HoloLens-Fan

A studio without IP is only worth

1. its pay roll and in some cases

2. premium for top end devs (which again is dependent on the individual capabilities) or

3. retention money for the stuff with bonds and such.

4. Other thing which could be important is the name of the studio itself which if highly popular could be a brand in itself

This is not at all insulting as well.

Fully agree because talent can come and go, but IPs can last forever.

[anon98342452]

@pg2g

Perhaps this is not the thread for you then

You’re right. Later again friends.

[Resist]

Eh, thinking about Ubisoft wouldn’t be a bad acquisition at all. They have incredibly lucrative GAAS and single player IPs, 20,000 talented devs, a large backlog of popular titles that could be added to GP.

[Hue]

@BadNews

Fully agree because talent can come and go, but IPs can last forever.

I think the other thing people are missing here are pre-existing structures, there’s something to be said for purchasing a pre-established studio.

There’s a reason why 85% of new studios fail, even if some staff leave the structure, processes, systems etc are still all in place by purchasing a pre-established studio.

IP are of course important but they can equally go out of date or loose interest. For example when I was young Lemmings was a massive game but nobody knows it now, it hasn’t had a new release in forever!

[profjjj]

@anon98342452

Just wanted to drop in and say that I can’t stand reading that these talented humans that make games are equated to “assets”, and even worse that they’re somehow less valuable than IP. What a horrible viewpoint. Also, just because you can poach talent doesn’t mean you’ll see the same quality output of a successful staffed studio. Chemistry is indeed a thing in games and elsewhere.

I’m not sure if I missed something in the discussion, but since I have referred to developers as assets I feel compelled to respond.

The context of my use of the word assets was in response to the idea that Ubisoft has too many employees, therefore some of them have no value and need to be fired. My response was basically, no they are valuable (they are assets) they don’t need to be fired.

Like many words, “asset” has multiple definitions:

• A useful or valuable thing, person, or quality
• Anything/anyone that generates revenue for the firm
• Property owned by a person or firm

I think it is fairly obvious that I was using the first definition above (though the second also applies). As employees/developers are neither property nor owned, the third is not applicable.

I have no idea why thinking someone is valuable is a bad thing. I would much rather be thought of as valuable than not.

Edit: I apologize if this seems pedantic. I am probably over explaining in the hope of providing clarity. And sometimes it’s hard to take my professor hat off…

[BadNews]

@Hue

I think the other thing people are missing here are pre-existing structures, there’s something to be said for purchasing a pre-established studio.

There’s a reason why 85% of new studios fail, even if some staff leave the structure, processes, systems etc are still all in place by purchasing a pre-established studio.

IP are of course important but they can equally go out of date or loose interest. For example when I was young Lemmings was a massive game but nobody knows it now, it hasn’t had a new release in forever!

Yeah a lot of intricate details with acquisitions. Ips are important but like you said structure and stability is also important. Finding the right balance is tough. For example playground had no IPS, but their structure and quality might be one of the best in industry

[howlingmosquito (mosquito)]

@Cairnst

Wasn’t the rumour surrounding Bungie simply that Microsoft weren’t interested in the sizable asking price?

Generally. They own a single meaningful IP (Destiny) which just meh Halo…its F2P so doesnt drive gamepass and its multiplatform so…doesnt sell Xboxs …buying Bungie does nothing. The rumor is they are working on a hero based PvP…so Destiny is going to fall by the wayaside…and Microsoft just bought Overwatch…and everything else under AB. They wouldnt pay as much as Sony.

[TheBrightestSun]

@Hue

There’s a reason why 85% of new studios fail

Because unlike big established teams, new studios cannot eat the costs of the failure.

@howlingmosquito

Generally. They own a single meaningful IP (Destiny) which just meh Halo…its F2P so doesnt drive gamepass and its multiplatform so…doesnt sell Xboxs …buying Bungie does nothing. The rumor is they are working on a hero based PvP…so Destiny is going to fall by the wayaside…and Microsoft just bought Overwatch…and everything else under AB. They wouldnt pay as much as Sony.

No, the rumor is that Microsoft did not want Bungie to make multiplatform games (aside keeping Destiny available), their asking price was lower for Microsoft. Microsoft was interested in Bungie because it owns high engagement IP and proven developers.

Microsoft wanted to acquire Bunige, but when ABK opportunity arrived, they immediately went after them.

[Jorge_Alexander_Acos (Jorge Alexander Acosta Duarte)]

@TheBrightestSun

Microsoft wanted to acquire Bunige, but when ABK opportunity arrived, they immediately went after them.

Good decision. Destiny does aboslutely nothing in the large scheme of things.

[TheBrightestSun]

@Jorge_Alexander_Acos

Good decision. Destiny does aboslutely nothing in the large scheme of things.

With ABK - yes, but without it - having Destiny in Game Pass could bring some new subscribers.

[Cairnst (Bill Cairns)]

@Jorge_Alexander_Acos

Good decision. Destiny does aboslutely nothing in the large scheme of things.

Compared to Activision? Absolutely they made the right decision, but in vacuum? I’m not so convinced, Bungie seems to have aspirations to grow massively, have multiple projects in development as well as expanding to make their games into multimedia franchises. Under Sony they could become HUGE, in which case I’d almost think they were worth a defensive acquisition.
That said though, I could just as equally see this whole thing stalling out and Bungie buying out their freedom once again in a few years time.

[Jorge_Alexander_Acos (Jorge Alexander Acosta Duarte)]

@Cairnst

Compared to Activision? Absolutely they made the right decision, but in vacuum? I’m not so convinced, Bungie seems to have aspirations to grow massively, have multiple projects in development as well as expanding to make their games into multimedia franchises. Under Sony they could become HUGE, in which case I’d almost think they were worth a defensive acquisition.
That said though, I could just as equally see this whole thing stalling out and Bungie buying out their freedom once again in a few years time.

@TheBrightestSun

With ABK - yes, but without it - having Destiny in Game Pass could bring some new subscribers.

We are talking about the rumor of MS dropping bungie in pursuit of ABK and I said they made the right decision.

In another universe Sony went to bungie and MS did nothing…but since whe are in the universe where MS bought the biggest third party publisher in the market and thus one of the biggest video game IPS in the world right now…yeah, destiny wouldnt do anything in the large shceme of things.

[Cairnst (Bill Cairns)]

@Jorge_Alexander_Acos

We are talking about the rumor of MS dropping bungie in pursuit of ABK and I said they made the right decision.

In another universe Sony went to bungie and MS did nothing…but since whe are in the universe where MS bought the biggest third party publisher in the market and thus one of the biggest video game IPS in the world right now…yeah, destiny wouldnt do anything in the large shceme of things.

Oh I absolutely agree that if Bungie was to in any way get in the road of an Activision acquisition that Microsoft made the right choice, I’m just saying that if Activision wasn’t even in the picture I would have seen value in Microsoft acquiring Bungie as a defensive acquisition even with the strict terms.

[hexbacon]

I think people underestimate the power of Destiny. True it isn’t Halo but it truly brings Halo number. Destiny overshadow Halo on steam by a big margin and while Halo main fanbase lives in Xbox, it’s still impressive how many active user it brings every weekend. In terms of Destiny free to play aspect, I think having the yearly expansion in gamepass would’ve been significant. I always wonder if MS can just work around Bungie canceling their agreement(at the end their shareholder want money) with Sony but it’s nothing more than wishing thinking. As a big Destiny fan, Bungie was the only Sony acquisition that has hurt a lot, only because Destiny has resonated with me a lot. Also we can’t ignore that 343i has done a poor job at a live service game, something that Bungie has mastered and it’s quite frankly the best at it.