Microsoft acquired Activision Blizzard King for $69 Billion on 2023-10-13

A point I haven't seen in these "overpaid" arguments is the plain obvious inflation and the coming implosion of the USD. MS spending cash on Activision they had parked on some accounts instead of buying a hard asset which will make them "future" money might not be such silly decision overall.

P.S. I wished they had bought UBI though:)
 
The one thing I will say about the comparisons between Activision's and Square Enix's western IPs is that I do believe that Microsoft needs some 3rd person narrative rich action games to compete with Sony's offerings, and Tomb Raider and Legacy of Kain are both in that genre. There are probably some deep cut Activision properties that could fit the bill as well. Heretic is owned by Activision I think, and Heretic 2 was a 3rd person game. But Tomb Raider and Kain would have been instant solutions with somewhat modern name recognition.
 
I do believe that Microsoft needs some 3rd person narrative rich action games to compete with Sony's offerings, and Tomb Raider and Legacy of Kain are both in that genre

Phil Spenser doesn't seem to think they need to compete with those types of Sony titles. Might be one of those 'we don't need that thing we can't have anyway' comments. :D
 
The one thing I will say about the comparisons between Activision's and Square Enix's western IPs is that I do believe that Microsoft needs some 3rd person narrative rich action games to compete with Sony's offerings, and Tomb Raider and Legacy of Kain are both in that genre. There are probably some deep cut Activision properties that could fit the bill as well. Heretic is owned by Activision I think, and Heretic 2 was a 3rd person game. But Tomb Raider and Kain would have been instant solutions with somewhat modern name recognition.

Phil Spenser doesn't seem to think they need to compete with those types of Sony titles. Might be one of those 'we don't need that thing we can't have anyway' comments. :D

Or maybe they think the upcoming Indiana Jones and rumored Mandalorian games would fill that spot for then?

MS may be lacking in 3rd person narrative action games but soon Sony will be lacking in WRPG games.

Also slowly MS can fill the void by bringing back older IP. Tomb raider hasn't been going in a long time and it being a timed exclusive didn't do much for them in the past. They also have hell blade now. Legacy of Kain is such an old franchise when was even the last title ? I am sure they would be just as succesfull rebooting one of Activisions titles as that.

Don't get me wrong Activision wouldn't have been on my list of thigns to purchase either. But here we are.

Personally I think Take-Two would have been a much better purchase for MS

You get Bioshock , border lands , civ , mafia , NBA, PGA , WEE, X-com, Grand theft auto , Red dead , Max pane and so much more. But Who knows maybe that is next for microsoft.
 
5276603-collection-of-free-facepalm-transparent-picard-download-on-ui-ex-facepalm-png-240_144_preview.png

Noone is denying this, Im saying per dollar spent this is not the case with most/all measures.
are you literally not reading what I'm writing

This is like the 2nd or 3rd recent thread I see here where I'm going hmmm, ...... I dont know what it is, social media perhaps, over exposure to too much junk. Or is it just me shouting at the cloud :LOL:

MS overpaid, just like sony did with Bungie.
I am literally reading what you're writing. Though I am not a person that actually works in mergers and acquisitions, the message I'm trying to communicate is that the value of 'goodwill' and their entire balance and income sheets, risk, etc play an integral role in a company's evaluation.

So you may think they overpaid, but you have a very narrow view of the inputs that go into determining the evaluation of these companies. I assure you that just looking at the IPs and the sticker price alone is _not_ sufficient to make this determination. I'm sure that it requires literal months of work completed by professional merger and acquisitions lawyers to determine a reasonable stock price to acquire a company. Consider this before jumping to conclusions that MS or Sony overpaid. They aren't charities, they will come out of this more profitable than if they did not.

The current stock price is 75. They believe its future value is 95. And that is the price they will pay to acquire Activision. This is still below ATVI's peak.
 
Or maybe they think the upcoming Indiana Jones and rumored Mandalorian games would fill that spot for then?
Perhaps, but there's a difference between licensing an IP and owning it. Remember when Goldeneye came out on N64, and then the license was scooped up by EA and the games went multiplatform? The reputation of Goldeneye sold units of 007 games on PS1. Or Spyro and Crash being Sony published console exclusives until they weren't. There's a difference in value when you can count on your work's reputation turning into future sales for you, and no somebody else.
 
https://www.axios.com/new-york-city-sues-activision-13ae2414-9ef7-42c0-a081-65b3e1cdf7a9.html

New York City sues Activision, targeting CEO Bobby Kotick
New York City pension funds files petition for information complaint against Activision

Activision CEO Bobby Kotick rushed to secure a takeover bid from Microsoft in order to escape liability for misconduct at the company, a new lawsuit from New York City officials alleges.

The suit was filed in Delaware on April 26 by New York City Employees’ Retirement System and pension funds for the city’s teachers, police and firefighters. The groups own Activision stock and believe actions by the gaming giant's management hurt the company’s value.

The lawsuit is an action in Delaware’s Court of Chancery (technically a “220 complaint”) that allows stockholders to press companies to open their books and potentially expose wrongdoing.

“Given Kotick’s personal responsibility and liability for Activision’s broken workplace, it should have been clear to the Board that he was unfit to negotiate a sale of the Company,” the suit says. “But it wasn’t.”

...
 
The one thing I will say about the comparisons between Activision's and Square Enix's western IPs is that I do believe that Microsoft needs some 3rd person narrative rich action games to compete with Sony's offerings, and Tomb Raider and Legacy of Kain are both in that genre.

Are they really lacking that much in those areas with all the acquisitions though? Double Fine make one of the most iconic 3rd person narrative focused games out there in Psychonauts and managed to follow that up with a really great Psychonauts 2. They obviously don't wow with the graphics, but there's only so much "bling" you can get out of a deliberate desire to have cartoonish graphics even if the subject matter is not at all cartoonish.

Ninja Theory has an acclaimed 3rd person narrative focused game in Senua's Sacrifice and are working on the follow up.

Obsidian Entertainment are known both for their excellent RPG games but also for their narrative focus within those games. Their next game appears to be a 3rd person game. It could be another 3rd person action-RPG or a pure 3rd person action spectacle (like Sony's narrative focused games). Either way it'll be a 3rd person narrative rich action game.

inXile has thus far mostly focused on top down 3rd person narrative focused RPGs with the notable exception of most recent The Bard's Tale. While the budgets they were working with precluded them from attempting a 3rd person action spectacle prior to the MS acquisition, we do know that their next project is an ambitious project with a larger budget that sounds like it may be unlike anything they've created up to this point. IE - with their excellent narrative focus that they've had in their games, it's entirely within the realm of possibility that they could make a 3rd person narratively focused action game.

Compulsion games with their limited indie budgets have done decent 3rd person action oriented narratively focused games. It's possible that with a larger budget under MS that they could create something more compelling.

And that isn't even touching on the 3rd person narrative games that studios under the Bethesda umbrella have created and will likely continue to create.

I completely understand that from the POV of studios prior to MS acquiring studios that there was a distinct lack of narrative focused 3rd person action games, but that simple is no longer true after all the acquitions.

Phil Spenser doesn't seem to think they need to compete with those types of Sony titles. Might be one of those 'we don't need that thing we can't have anyway' comments. :D

Continuing from the above, in fact, one of the reasons that Phil Spencer went on the acquisition spree was he wanted to broaden the single player appeal of the games that were created under the Microsoft Game Studios umbrella. In fact, narrative focused single player experiences being one of the key ones he's talked about.

Hence, you see that almost all of the early acquisitions were studios with a heavy focus on narrative storytelling in games. Double Fine, inXile, Ninja Theory, Obsidian Entertainment and to a slightly lesser extent Compulsion Games. 4 of those with experience releasing 3rd person action oriented narratively focused games.

Regards,
SB
 
HoegLaw has a series of tweets in this latest related event.
Ok, so this is a books and records request (not a more substantive lawsuit), it's not filed by the city but by funds that have an investment interest in Activision, and, to be frank, the 98% shareholder approval really harms the "value is too low/improperly negotiated argument".

It's not nothing, but compared to everything else Activision (and Microsoft) have going on...it's pretty darn close.

 
Continuing from the above, in fact, one of the reasons that Phil Spencer went on the acquisition spree was he wanted to broaden the single player appeal of the games that were created under the Microsoft Game Studios umbrella. In fact, narrative focused single player experiences being one of the key ones he's talked about

He wants to broaden their portfolio in general. He's pretty clear they're not trying to do MS versions of Sony titles, Forza vs GT style.

"Our strategy is not to just go be like someone else," he says. "I get a push sometimes of 'where's your version of this or that [game]?'. I've been in this industry for a long time, I have a ton of respect for creators on all platforms, and I know many, many of them. But it's good if we're doing something different than what other platforms are doing. We're not in the business of just trying to create a green version of somebody else's blue or red coloured platform. That's not the example of creativity that I want to see in the games industry."

https://www.gamesradar.com/xbox-eve...s-an-xbox-app-on-as-many-devices-as-possible/
 
Last edited:
He wants to broaden their portfolio in general. His pretty clear they not trying to do MS version of Sony titles, Forza vs GT style.



https://www.gamesradar.com/xbox-eve...s-an-xbox-app-on-as-many-devices-as-possible/

Well, yes. As I mentioned it was just one of the reasons. A very important one, hence, as I pointed out, most of their early acquisitions was developers with a narrative focus in their games.

They've also picked up studios like Undead Labs (Survival Horror Sandbox) and Playground Games (A more arcade take on driving games versus Turn 10's more simulation focus) neither of which have a history of making narratively focused single player games.

Narratively focused games was a glaring hole in their games portfolio and so it was one that they filled as quickly as they could once they decided that they wanted to broaden the appeal of their game studios. They don't want to be an MS version of Sony Games, hence their existing studios aren't being tasked with making narratively focused games. And some of the new studios that they picked up fill other gaps in their game portfolio.

In that respect, the Zenimax acquisition was a great pickup. It features both narrative heavy studios as well as studios without a narrative focus. It gives more variety to some important genres while bolstering other non-narratively focused genres.

It'd be naive in the extreme to think that Phil Spencer would seek to broaden their gaming portfolio and then ignore one of the most important modern day segments, narratively focused games. However, as we can see, narrative focused developers was very high on his list in terms of holes that needed to be filled within Microsoft's Game Studios.

Looking at the studios that were picked up, another large focus appears to be open world sandbox developers. State of Decay, Playground Games and Bethesda Game Studios pretty much only make open world sandbox games and do a really good job at it.

Regards,
SB
 
HoegLaw has a series of tweets in this latest related event.

Unless the Board misled investors, who voted overwhelmingly to accept the offer, I don't see what the problem. Is Kotick a knobhead? Yes. Do the actual owners of Activision-Blizzaard want to sell the company to Microsoft? Yes. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"Activision CEO Bobby Kotick rushed to secure a takeover bid from Microsoft in order to escape liability for misconduct at the company, a new lawsuit from New York City officials alleges."

I don't know what world they live in but in my world high-level executives of billion dollar companies that are forced out often do so with a golden parachute which can be worth 100s of millions of dollars.
 
And they have Perfect Dark, Fable, Psychonaults, Hellblade etc...

As I stated earlier: People are acting like MS lost future Tomb Raider games. They're still coming to Xbox, along with Thief, Deus Ex and Kain games when and if they get made. As long as they didn't go exclusively to Sony, why does MS need them? They have 32 studios and probably 40 dev teams now.

It's awesome to live in a world where Sony fans don't think MS are buying enough studios. LOL
 
Last edited:
So there seems to be this idea that MS lacks 3rd person action rpg. In a thread where they are acquiring Diablo...

They were specifically referring to third person narrative focused action games. Diablo isn't terribly narratively focused. It has an interesting story, but the game isn't particularly narratively focused.

Compare that to The Last of Us, the modern God of War (not the older games), Senua's Sacrifice or Psychonauts, those are focused on the narrative with the gameplay assisting in telling the narrative. With Diablo, the story is more there to give the gameplay a form of cohesion in much the same way as the original God of War games. They have a story, but the focus of the games is the action oriented gameplay.

Regards,
SB
 
Back
Top