CaptainHowdy
Regular
V3 said:
Real Time Strategy without a mouse, is like Sex without a partner.
MS buys vivendi games division?
- Thread starter Qroach
- Start date
Real Time Strategy without a mouse, is like Sex without a partner.
Warcraft 2 for the PSX was surprisingly good I thought.
Starcraft for the N64 sucked though.
And for the life of me I don't understand why some people think if MS buys Vivendi that Warcraft won't be released on the PC. Not only is that absurd, it's obviously from someone who is just looking for excuses to troll or bash MS.
Starcraft for the N64 sucked though.
And for the life of me I don't understand why some people think if MS buys Vivendi that Warcraft won't be released on the PC. Not only is that absurd, it's obviously from someone who is just looking for excuses to troll or bash MS.
With the money Microsoft is investing into Xbox, I can't see why they wouldn't try to promote their console with Blizzard games if they were to buy Vivendi out. Just imagine how many PC gamers would consider to get an Xbox if it ment to experience their beloved games...
Now that I think about it, I think that might be quite possible. Taking steps as these will definately secure them a good place in the industry.
Now that I think about it, I think that might be quite possible. Taking steps as these will definately secure them a good place in the industry.
G
Guest
Guest
A Blizzard Sierra Valve buyout will give MS the crown in the US. 
Well contrary to popular xbot fanboi belief, the object of the game isn't to 'get the crown' or some stupid shit like that, it's to MAKE MONEY.
How long a string of hit games do you think they'd have to put out to even BREAK EVEN after buying Blizzard, Valve and Sierra? Games that cost quite a bit to produce to begin with btw.
Even MS can't go around buying everything and everyone you know.
*G*
How long a string of hit games do you think they'd have to put out to even BREAK EVEN after buying Blizzard, Valve and Sierra? Games that cost quite a bit to produce to begin with btw.
Even MS can't go around buying everything and everyone you know.
*G*
G
Guest
Guest
MS makes more than enough MONEY from their software side.
In the long run anti MS fanbois, in the long run. 8)
Once Sony and Nintendo are out of the picture, profits will come, big profits.
In the long run anti MS fanbois, in the long run. 8)
Once Sony and Nintendo are out of the picture, profits will come, big profits.
True, except that 'having the crown' usually carries the greatest potential to 'make money'. I am fully aware that a take-over at this scape will put quite a dent in future earnings - but I believe that the console market is far more lucrative than the PC one. Imagine the money if Microsoft managed to convince a big share of the PC market to buy an Xbox and their favorite Blizzard games. Not only would they have a market for their own, they'd also have the potential sales to make the big bucks.
Possible?
Phil:
If you can tap a market and tap it well, there's no real reason to turn down easy money. Forcing those franchises console-exclusive probably wouldn't have a positive enough effect on Xbox for Microsoft to sacrifice guaranteed PC sales like that.
For most publishers. Blizzard, however, sells many more copies of their PC games than most console publishers manage in the more-lucrative console market.
If you can tap a market and tap it well, there's no real reason to turn down easy money. Forcing those franchises console-exclusive probably wouldn't have a positive enough effect on Xbox for Microsoft to sacrifice guaranteed PC sales like that.
You see, if Microsoft would take over it doesn't mean they would have to abandon the PC market completely. Since Microsoft is likely to continue their console as PC hybrid, you can expect easy porting. Baring that in mind, they could shuffle resources within Blizzard (as an example) to Xbox development and launch it maybe half a year earlier than the PC version. This of course will piss a lot of PC owners off, but when they see how good the Xbox(2) version will be running and already available, it will make it far more attractive to just buy the cheap console and join the experience. Like that, they wouldn't be sacrificing anything, but would definately make their console even more attractive.
Of course, but we're taking the potential into consideration, Blizzard on console could be far more luctrative. Piracy on PC is also a very big issue - shuffling products onto a fixed and closed platform will only do good.
Don't get me wrong, for this to happen, Microsoft will have to things smart. All I'm saying is that the potential and possibility is there. Halo is a wonderful example: from its PC background it became the Xbox flagship title. Now imagine a game from Blizzard. If that wouldn't convert a few PC owneres, I don't know what will.
The Warcraft games can stay on PC even after a buyout if that's where they sell the most. But I can envision a console game settled in the Warcraft universe like Stracraft Ghost. Nothing truly bad about that.
What I truly want from Blizzard is a polished 3D remake of Blackthorne on a console.
What I truly want from Blizzard is a polished 3D remake of Blackthorne on a console.
zidane1strife
Banned
Difference is... by 2005 xbox supporter's will have dealt with a death in the family.... a death that shall take place likely in 2004...
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
Vince, go check gamerankings.com to see who has the better 1st party games according to the media (MS - 75.3, Sony - 72.4). We've already been over this before.
As for Blizzard (88.6% - highest rated developer at Gamerankings.com), it would be a great pick-up for MS. They'd probably start off by doing 75% PC and 25% console titles, then gradually shift more to consoles over time.
RTS games will be fine on consoles as soon as voice recognition evolves enough. This will solve the control problems of not having a mouse. Eventually, the PC will become unnecessary to gaming. There will still be a niche market there, but few people will care.
As for Blizzard (88.6% - highest rated developer at Gamerankings.com), it would be a great pick-up for MS. They'd probably start off by doing 75% PC and 25% console titles, then gradually shift more to consoles over time.
RTS games will be fine on consoles as soon as voice recognition evolves enough. This will solve the control problems of not having a mouse. Eventually, the PC will become unnecessary to gaming. There will still be a niche market there, but few people will care.
Johnny Awesome said:
Not only has this discussion just reached a new low and deserves a Surgeon Generals warning for Inducing Neuronal Suicide, but I will further retard it by asking what the Margin of Error is?
Seriously, your acting stupid.
Since when does:
Age of Empires 1/1/1999 PC 8.0 87.7%
Age of Empires 2 10/15/1999 PC 8.5 91.3%
Age of Empires: Rise of Rome 1/1/1999 PC 8.1 82.4%
Age of Mythology 10/30/2002 PC 8.3 89.5%
Allegiance 3/30/2000 PC 7.5 84.1%
The Close Combat Series
Flight Simulator Series
et al.
And the rest of MS's supurb PC games factor into to Console gaming? Or did MS publish 99 games for XBox, and I'm just not aware?
The same with Sony, atleast their games are 99% Console in that list though (PSX, PS2)
Johnny Awesome
Veteran
Well, Microsoft's Xbox average is only 73.6%, still higher than Sony's average though.
Sony fans might not like it, but Microsoft's 1st party titles are more highly regarded than Sony's by the gaming media.
Sony fans might not like it, but Microsoft's 1st party titles are more highly regarded than Sony's by the gaming media.
If Blizzard "gradually shifts more to consoles over time", I'll kill those evil Microsoft overlords. I'm sure there will be plenty enough angry mobs to help me in my mission.
Blizzard is the uberdominating company of PC gaming, not console gaming! Starcraft:Ghost is the most console-centric Blizz thing that the fans will tolerate. (even then, plenty of hate was spewed at SC:G) The moment Blizzard's main-line titles (Diablo is the most obvious) move over to console, there will be massive mutiny.
In fact, I sincerely doubt MS will gradually shift Blizzard to consoles. Despite their roots in NES gaming, Blizzard built their name with Warcraft and Diablo, both PC games. They are a household name in PC gaming, but next to unknown in console gaming... neither Warcraft 2, Diablo, or Starcraft saw much success in their console incarnations. If they buy Blizzard, it will be to cement their stranglehold on the PC gaming market, not to barge into the console market where their previous acquisition, Bungie, has a lot better brand-name strength.
Blizzard is the uberdominating company of PC gaming, not console gaming! Starcraft:Ghost is the most console-centric Blizz thing that the fans will tolerate. (even then, plenty of hate was spewed at SC:G) The moment Blizzard's main-line titles (Diablo is the most obvious) move over to console, there will be massive mutiny.
In fact, I sincerely doubt MS will gradually shift Blizzard to consoles. Despite their roots in NES gaming, Blizzard built their name with Warcraft and Diablo, both PC games. They are a household name in PC gaming, but next to unknown in console gaming... neither Warcraft 2, Diablo, or Starcraft saw much success in their console incarnations. If they buy Blizzard, it will be to cement their stranglehold on the PC gaming market, not to barge into the console market where their previous acquisition, Bungie, has a lot better brand-name strength.
Blizzard also had three big hits on SNES.
I say as long as StarCraft stays on PC I really don't give a flying fuck.
If anything, Microsoft will probably make Blizzard speed things up a little and do a better job sticking to deadlines... and also hopefully make them do just as good a job with the deadline as without it.
Diablo does have a (not incredibly good but at least decent) PSX port, BTW.
Diablo would be pretty odd on a console but it wouldn't be too bad.
I say as long as StarCraft stays on PC I really don't give a flying fuck.
If anything, Microsoft will probably make Blizzard speed things up a little and do a better job sticking to deadlines... and also hopefully make them do just as good a job with the deadline as without it.
Diablo does have a (not incredibly good but at least decent) PSX port, BTW.
Diablo would be pretty odd on a console but it wouldn't be too bad.
CaptainHowdy
Regular
BoddoZerg said:
thank you, glad someone feels the way I do..
I am not arguing Blizzard would be good for MS, just that it would be bad for Blizzard.. they would have to change their games to no ends.
