In the broader market if you are borrowing yes, but if you are cash rich then it is ideal time to buy with valuations currently tanked. It’s a buyers market for the likes of the Savvy group, tencent, Microsoft(and other big tech that may want to get into gaming).
1 Like
They had a terrible money debt to absorb.
4 Likes
Everything I’m seeing just reinforcing my previous impressions.
Their new multiplatform initiative is a clear case of seeking profitability at the expense of their combined console+gamepass ecosystem push. They are willing to give up a bit of competitive edge for the sake of earning a bit of money and if it goes well, more will follow later. So this to me rules out any signficant moves where you’d be acquiring companies with the explicit purpose of strengthening Xbox competitively - like, if they were willing to buy Eidos and take tomb Raider excluisive, why wouldn’t they be willing to sacrifice modest revenues to keep critically acclaimed titles exclusive?
Along similar lines, I also think that they continue to be very uninterested in in-housing any support studios. Even if they weren’t firing people two years in a row, having teams external to Microsoft seems almost better than having more direct lines under XGS getting tied up in their contractor nonsense.
Acquisitions targeted at acquiring very profitable games and IPs aren’t something I could rule out, but if so that would definitely be more along the lines of a Minecraft, something that can be taken to all platforms and print money. Pocket Pair is the type of company I mean, even though that company specifically doesn’t seem keen for an acquisition.
1 Like
Someone raised a really interesting point to this the other day that Take-Two own the publishing rights to Borderlands.
If someone outside of T2 acquire them they still have to work with them which may limit the publishers.
1 Like
Support studios is a much better solution to MS, because those studios are not subjected to the infamous 18 month contract kiss of death for workers that plague all MS studios.
2 Likes
Tomb Raider is still one of the most valuable IP you could get, and being in Embracer hands is a pity. MS could look for it.
1 Like
Tomb Raider doesn’t print cash and I think they are looking more at profitability. Also, I don’t recall Tomb raider or Eidos on their list.
makes sense. I do think they would like to do something major in Japan and maybe Korea which might help strengthen the brand should they do more multiplats. I do think they would do best with Sega. They could take Sonic to new heights, and they also have mobile.
1 Like
I don’t know when they will buy next, between the ABK acquisition being such a huge organisation to implement into their business and the current climate it’s hard to say they will purchase anyone anytime soon but if/when they do I don’t expect the studios people were hoping they’d buy, the Asobo’s, CD’s etc
What they will be going for is big stuff that they see value in bringing everywhere, with potential communities along side mobile
CD are a great dev and TR is a great IP but they are also an expensive team and even if they brought something like TR to every platform I just don’t see MS being all that interested
I think things like SEGA or even Square are more likely going forward than they were before, gives them content they are lacking in and more worldwide appeal, are games that they can bring to every platform, can expand heavily to mobile, IPs that can be better utilised than they are now and have communities and engagement which is what these companies are after these days
Probably more than Banjo.
Tomb Raider had many games and 3 movies, the last three were very competent Uncharted clones with good tech. They suffered of Square mismanagement, but they can recover.
But also costs more than Banjo to make, and we haven’t seen them rush off to make Banjo even though people have asked for years.
Don’t get me wrong, I liked the movies at least as much as the uncharted one, and what I’ve played of the games have been good, but they’re not massively appealing to everyone at the moment. I didn’t think the most recent one did that hot either which likely led to lower valuation
Straight cash deals in the billions are extremely rare. It’s a big reason why the ABK deal was able to happen, MS is one of a very few companies who can do it. Sony for instance, could not. IDK how much cash on hand tencent actually has either
Agreed.
Tomb Raider is actually up there with other big franchises like Gran Turismo, Monster Hunter, WWE 2K, Battlefield, Dragon Quest & Borderlands:
Without the meddling of Square and Embracer I think they could do great things. I still think Avengers could have been amazing before Square made it a GAAS game…
Plus as you highlighted it also has the benefit of previously being in film too with Angelina Jolie and Alicia Vikander-Fassbender.
I think people forget how big Crystal Dynamics once was, they ironically (re: recent news) owned Toys 4 Bob at one point. Strauss Zelnick (Take-Two) was their CEO and they even were partly owned by HBO!
1 Like
I guess will see once the trailer hits for the next one and maybe based on how Indiana Jones does. I think like most are saying the current Xbox has no interest in the IP. I’d even say they would have made a move on before ABK if they wanted it. I’m not sure what meddling SE had on it though, Avengers I could understand seeing the ridiculous license charges on Spiderman, Avengers was probably worse and a total loss for SE. The TR films have been Ok at best nowhere near what is expected. In my opinion I think TR is best with Amazon as they are the ones that see any potential in it and could spin off a streaming series on it.
Totally agree from here on I would be looking at publishers or studios that bring something not just to Xbox gaming but more so to Microsoft as a whole. I would consider Crytek for their graphics and engine capabilities as this can be of use in generative A.I. Sega will be another good one for Mobile and we have seen the way they’ve been touting Sonic as a marketing avatar for Edge. The character seems to be one Microsoft has big plans for and is just languishing in Sega. There is a possibility Microsoft could also go after IP like comics or Novels. One Comic franchise that I would love to see is the CrossGen comics which is wasting away at Disney.
I think there is interest in games like Tomb Raider on Xbox, it’s simply that Xbox hasn’t really curated a audience for these types of games on the platform. As I mentioned in another thread they need to start releasing these types of games regularly to draw this audience to Xbox which studios like CD would help with. I believe Hellblade 2 is the first big cinematic 3rd person from Xbox first party since the XBone.
I think CD going to Amazon would be awful, we have seen what has happened with their previous ventures.
It’s quite well known that Square forced CD down the GAAS route. If you play the earlier missions such as the ones with Kamala Khan it’s fantastic and feels like a Marvel version of Tomb Raider. Later in the game they all just become generic repeatable missions which you just grind over and over. If CD were able to make a traditional single player game like the beginning missions it would have been awesome.
2 Likes
You don’t need to cultivate an audience for a mainstream genre. If Sony put GOW on Xbox do you think it wouldn’t sell?
Not anywhere near as much as Playstation no.
Of course because of the number of users. Even in shooters which was Xbox’s genre, PS by numbers sells more. It’s not like a third person game is a niche genre like JRPG or something.
Like I said profitability is the thing for Xbox now. You have Amy Hood and Satya saying the ABK needs to begin making money immediately. They don’t have the time to start curating an audience for this type of games anymore. The GAAS for Avengers was indeed mandated by SE but I would imagine SE had no choice considering the exorbitant price Disney charges. At this point Microsoft proper is breathing down Xbox neck. Maybe they can still get TR, but it won’t be what they are going for at this time.
Xbox has a strong history of supporting live service games well beyond what other developers would have and it’s part of what has put in a good position so far as profitability goes. I see nothing to suggest this has changed, especially as they continue to support Halo Infinite despite it’s shaky launch, as they continue to push to improve upon Redfall despite it’s terrible launch and they continue to support every other struggling live service title that they built to success.
And as for the Disney part, I can’t see how Disney’s “exorbitant” fees woulda pushed SE into anything given how many developers putting out Disney licensed games don’t to live service 
I don’t think a publisher pushing for live service revenue really needs a greater explanation behind it.
1 Like
Microsoft, I believe want to build Xbox to the level of their other businesses with about a 40% margin, that’s not easy to come by. a lot of Disney properties are on Mobile and they are all Live service games and those are the games really doing well and EA in prior times did Battle front so I really think that had a factor in it. I don’t think SE just decided to include GAAS in it considering they don’t make games like that. I would think since they complain about all the CD games not selling enough, they went with the live option to mitigate that.