cheapchips
Veteran
MS have loads of IP and not enough talented teams to leverage them. There's nothing to preclude IP deals either. Even Sony are doing that with Marvel stuff.
Embracer Studio Acquisitions and Divestitures
- Thread starter cheapchips
- Start date
MS have loads of IP and not enough talented teams to leverage them. There's nothing to preclude IP deals either. Even Sony are doing that with Marvel stuff.
ChuckeRearmed
Regular
That's debatable as studios should want to work on those IPs first. A lot of Microsoft internal studios want to work on their own IPs. As Tim Schafer mentioned - "we are not the cover band".
Not every studio is Insomniac who wants to work on Marvel's IP.
cheapchips
Veteran
I think 'it depends', rather than it being debatable. Double Fine are absolutely a team you want making original properties. Someone like Rockstady on the otherhand, it suits them quite well to do a spin on someone else's IP.
Do you think the Rocksteady Batman games would be any less great if you swapped super heroes? I would play the shit out of a Rocksteady built Ninjak game if it played just like an Arkham game, and wouldn't care that he's just generic Batman. I also believe that if WB's game division is for sale, it would include the videogame specific IP they own. The Midway IPs, Mortal Kombat, anything Monolith owned the rights to.... Just not the licensed stuff like Lego of stuff from the movie division. Although, there's no stopping the sale to include a timed license for that stuff as well. If Microsoft buys WB Games might actually get the No One Lives Forever IP, as the parties involved were Monolith, Fox Interactive, Sierra, all of which would be owned by Microsoft.
ChuckeRearmed
Regular
This basically owned by NRS. That's why I mentioned that NRS is the thing MS will be interested in 100%. Especially with MK IP.
And like I mentioned before Microsoft did not bother with Tomb Raider and Deus Ex (though probably the reasons are more complex than that), why would they care for even more niche stuff? NOLF is a cool IP though.
And who else?
Does it matter
and
A ninja and a spy.
He's a Batman-esque character from the Valiant universe. The same comics continuity the Bloodshot (zombie android punisher), XO Manowar (knock off alien tech Iron Man) and Shadowman are from.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
IPs matter, but MS has tons of them now. With what they have I could see them just doing their best to stop Sony from getting too many multi-platform titles as exclusive IPs.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
None of Sony's acquisitions in the last ten yers have been about acquiring IPs. Can you name any multi-platform IPs that went PlayStation exclusive after Sony acquired them?
The idea that Microsoft acquiring multi-platform IP is somehow good because it prevents Sony getting them, when a real consequence is that anybody who games exclusively on Nintendo and PlayStaton platforms - the two largest console platforms - may lose access to those games is madness.
This is literally the anti-Spock argument; the wants of the few outweighs the wants of the many.
Last edited by a moderator:
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
Let's not be naïve. Destiny won't be multi-platform later.
You misunderstood me, I think. IF Sony tries to grab Tomb Raider or FF for themselves then MS should try to outbid them. Otherwise MS probably has enough exclusive IPs to work with and just let those continue as multi-platform.
Also, as you know from my earlier comments I don't see much difference between buying Insomniac and developing exclusives like Ratchet & Clank that they keep from other platforms and MS just going and buying Bethesda and making ES6 exclusive. Either way these companies are using their money to get exclusive content. MS is just doing it after the IPs are proven winners in the marketplace. Sony is buying people to create exclusives and MS is buying existing creations. That doesn't mean I'm blind to the emotional reasons people see it differently.
You misunderstood me, I think. IF Sony tries to grab Tomb Raider or FF for themselves then MS should try to outbid them. Otherwise MS probably has enough exclusive IPs to work with and just let those continue as multi-platform.
Also, as you know from my earlier comments I don't see much difference between buying Insomniac and developing exclusives like Ratchet & Clank that they keep from other platforms and MS just going and buying Bethesda and making ES6 exclusive. Either way these companies are using their money to get exclusive content. MS is just doing it after the IPs are proven winners in the marketplace. Sony is buying people to create exclusives and MS is buying existing creations. That doesn't mean I'm blind to the emotional reasons people see it differently.
Fully agree, the outcome is the same, just a different way of getting there.
ChuckeRearmed
Regular
I think it will. Bungie is a special case there.
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
Maybe. I could see an argument for leaving it as is, but it won't be out of the goodness of Sony's heart if they do. Same goes for CoD on PS IMO.
Sony's play has been funding games and acquiring the IP without the studio for years though. Ratchet, Sly and Jak are all Sony IPs and have been before Sony purchased those studios. The fact that Insomniac made Sunset Overdrive with Microsoft was a direct result of this relationship because they wanted to own their own IP, and Microsoft allowed for this. Not that it mattered for them in the end because they got acquired anyway.
Sony doesn't need to acquire companies to acquire IPs because they pick them up by funding development and publishing agreements with independent studios. I'm not saying this is bad, nor is purchasing companies for the IP, just that it's a different way to build an IP portfolio, and that's something Microsoft ignored for much too long.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Sony have been pretty categoric about Bungie. The studio will remain independently managed and Destiny will remain multi-platform.
Fair enough, but I couldn't ever see Sony wanting Tomb Raider having developed their own successful IP (Uncharted). It's all bit circular, the original Tomb Raider pioneered and developed the genre then fell out of favour, Uncharted re-invigorated it and Tomb Raider got rebooted. Tomb Raider, Uncharted, Indiana Jones - I think there is sufficient pulp action-adventure IPs to go around. For Sony to buy Tomb Raider as they're moving away from Uncharted would just be weird. Not that Sony don't do weird inexplicable things.
But as I've posted a lot, Sony rarely cling to their IP for multiple generations. It's really, very rare outside of Gran Turismo (PS1), God of War (PS2) and Ratchet & Clank (PS2). R&C had there games on PS2, one on PSP, one on PS3, one on PS4 (remaster) and one on PS5. I think that's the most games I've seen from Sony from one IP, seven games over four generations over 20 years.
There is an old saying which goes that you cannot miss which you never had. I think that is what drives those different views. I'm way more pragmatic and accepting of the situation. The console market has always been a competitive environment. My first console was an Atari 2600 and I remember seeing games for other consoles that weren't on the Atari and vice-versa. Same with the 8-bit computers, I had a Commodore 64 and my friends had a mix of 64s and ZX Spectrums. Not all games were on all platforms.
But I do disagree that any of this is about depriving people of things. It's about adding value and to your own product. What's the difference? Well, I'm a glass-half-full kind of guy as well!
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I agree. I understand why people don't see a different (like Johnny Awesome) and why people get annoyed when an IP available on they platform disappears. As I said to Mr Awesome - above - I think I'm just more accepting of the reality of the market. It probably also helps that I own all the plastic boxes and I have a disposable income in excess to play any game I want.
It's time to play them I lack. As I got older I transitions from not having enough money to play all the games I wanted to not having the time to play all the games. I think there was a brief nirvana interim period but it was fairly short.
snc
Veteran
Its looking at market from perspective of excel which is imo shortsighted, guardian of galaxy shows that studio was clearly very talented. It was square enix fault they created earlier boring avengers service game that nobody wanted, now they imo will lose even more with puting money to nft basket. How sony and microsoft ignored this deal I cant understand
vjPiedPiper
Newcomer
IP rights to LoTR and The Hobbit IP literary works
Embracer Group AB (”Embracer”), through its wholly owned subsidiary Freemode, has entered into an agreement to acquire Middle-earth Enterprises, a division of The Saul Zaentz Company, which owns a vast intellectual property catalogue and worldwide rights to motion pictures, video games, board games, merchandising, theme parks and stage productions relating to the iconic fantasy literary works The Lord of the Rings trilogy and The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien, as well as matching rights in other Middle-earth-related literary works authorized by the Tolkien Estate and HarperCollins, which have yet to be explored.
embracer.com
Embracer Group AB (”Embracer”), through its wholly owned subsidiary Freemode, has entered into an agreement to acquire Middle-earth Enterprises, a division of The Saul Zaentz Company, which owns a vast intellectual property catalogue and worldwide rights to motion pictures, video games, board games, merchandising, theme parks and stage productions relating to the iconic fantasy literary works The Lord of the Rings trilogy and The Hobbit by J.R.R. Tolkien, as well as matching rights in other Middle-earth-related literary works authorized by the Tolkien Estate and HarperCollins, which have yet to be explored.
Embracer Group enters into agreement to acquire IP rights to The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit literary works by J.R.R Tolkien - Embracer Group
Embracer Group AB (”Embracer”), through its wholly owned subsidiary Freemode[1], has entered into an agreement to acquire Middle-earth Enterprises, a division of The Saul Zaentz Company, which owns a vast intellectual property catalogue and worldwide rights to motion pictures, video games, board...
embracer.com
