What should Sony's Acquisition Plans Be? *spawn*

[Deleted member 11852]

I think the rumor was 20B right ? So 20B for a company in which all its ips are owned by yet another company. Doesn't seem smart to me. Bethesda was 8B and they got all the ip. Activision was 70B and they get all the ip.

Assuming that there was provision for WB Games to also transfer their limited use licences (Batman, Lord of the Rings) to a buyer, the difference in value is that that IP has appeal far exceeding games, whereas Zenimax and Activision's IPs do not - unless I'm overlooking something.

Call of Duty isn't an IP, it's a trademark. With few exceptions (like Captian Price and the Modern Warfare trilogy) there is no wider continuity, the dev teams are constantly making new characters, environment and time times. If the box didn't have Call of Duty on it, you otherwise could not connect the games at all because there is no defining quality. E.g.. Batman has Batman and a wider cast of characters that exist in that universe.

You could take any Call of Duty devs, have them crank out another shooters with the exact same mechanics as Call of Duty, call it something else and there would be zero case for infringement because first person shooters have been around for 30 years. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. Sometimes the value of things makes no sense at all.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

MS may want to go after DC but unless they get Discovery to give them a license in perpetuity or decades I doubt they would buy it.

That's the thing. I think MS may try to do Spider-Man maneuvre - basically purchase gaming rights for DC properties.

I think the rumor was 20B right ? So 20B for a company in which all its ips are owned by yet another company. Doesn't seem smart to me. Bethesda was 8B and they got all the ip. Activision was 70B and they get all the ip.

I am not sure what 20B rumor was, but I highly doubt it was WB. As Warner-Discovery is much bigger.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I think everyone should look at Sony's first party output and look at its weakness. Sony makes popular 3rd person action games like uncharted and the last of us. Sony lacks in RPGs , First person shooters , Racing games , adventure games and strategy games.

I think sony should look into studios that can help fill out what they are lacking .

They shouldn't need to - these genres are well catered to by third parties. Why create another FPS or RPG when there are plenty out there? It only becomes an issue if a genre is under-represented, at which point a console company may choose to invest in that genre to fill out the overall value of their platform. For example, let's say there are two consoles both catered to with RPGs and racers from a dozen different publishers, but few shooters. One company could invest in making shooters and stand out with their unique library. Investing in more RPGs and racers wouldn't make a great deal of sense, unless you can bring something unique. And you don't necessarily need to own a studio to do that where you can instead go to an existing talented studio and commission them to make something specially for your library.

 

[cheapchips]

I am not sure what 20B rumor was, but I highly doubt it was WB. As Warner-Discovery is much bigger.

AT&T were looking to ditch bits of the empire to cover dept. As far as we can tell, they didn't manage to snag a buyer for WB Games or just changed their mind.

 

[eastmen]

That's the thing. I think MS may try to do Spider-Man maneuvre - basically purchase gaming rights for DC properties.


I am not sure what 20B rumor was, but I highly doubt it was WB. As Warner-Discovery is much bigger.

Discovery is bigger , the rumors were before the discover deal happened. But like I said unless they were willing to sell the ip rights over then the dc properties weren't really worth much . Sony controls the Spiderman movies and games. If MS only had power over DC game ip they would only have a third of what those licenses appear in. I also don't see what the owner of DC would really gain from tying their comic ips to a single video game creator.

They shouldn't need to - these genres are well catered to by third parties. Why create another FPS or RPG when there are plenty out there? It only becomes an issue if a genre is under-represented, at which point a console company may choose to invest in that genre to fill out the overall value of their platform. For example, let's say there are two consoles both catered to with RPGs and racers from a dozen different publishers, but few shooters. One company could invest in making shooters and stand out with their unique library. Investing in more RPGs and racers wouldn't make a great deal of sense, unless you can bring something unique. And you don't necessarily need to own a studio to do that where you can instead go to an existing talented studio and commission them to make something specially for your library.

Cool So what is the next Big CRPG/WRPG game to hit the playstation ? Where is the next big third party Racing game ? Where are the strategy games ?


I get your point about third parties and there are a lot of genres that they cater too. But there are some on consoles that are sorely lacking. MS buying up Bethesda completely changed the landscape for RPGS and there aren't many third party strategy games out there anymore.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

AT&T were looking to ditch bits of the empire to cover dept. As far as we can tell, they didn't manage to snag a buyer for WB Games or just changed their mind.

They asked for 4B for studios without any IP. Was too expensive for what it worth.

Discovery is bigger , the rumors were before the discover deal happened. But like I said unless they were willing to sell the ip rights over then the dc properties weren't really worth much . Sony controls the Spiderman movies and games. If MS only had power over DC game ip they would only have a third of what those licenses appear in. I also don't see what the owner of DC would really gain from tying their comic ips to a single video game creator.

Sony doesn't control games. They just make a deal with Disney as Disney owns game rights on IP. In general that Spider-man IP is very very complex. I remember HoegLaw mentioned that he read the license aggrement and it was crazy complex. Every license can be purchases with enough price.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

ICool So what is the next Big CRPG/WRPG game to hit the playstation ? Where is the next big third party Racing game ? Where are the strategy games ?

Depends what you consider an RPG. Both Dying Light and Horizon Forbidden West have heavy RPG elements. If not, then Square Enix's Forsaken (formerly Project Athia) is probably the next notable RPG. Racers are definitely a declining genre which is why there a fraction of them compared to 10 to 15 years ago. Gran Turismo 7 launches in March.

There are strategy games (Civ, Stellaris etc) on PlayStation but they sell even lower numbers than racers. When was the last time you saw a console strategy game in the the top ten of sales? But Marvel's Midnight Suns isn't far off and Two Point Campus is due this year.

 

[eastmen]

Depends what you consider an RPG. Both Dying Light and Horizon Forbidden West have heavy RPG elements. If not, then Square Enix's Forsaken (formerly Project Athia) is probably the next notable RPG. Racers are definitely a declining genre which is why there a fraction of them compared to 10 to 15 years ago. Gran Turismo 7 launches in March.

There are strategy games (Civ, Stellaris etc) on PlayStation but they sell even lower numbers than racers. When was the last time you saw a console strategy game in the the top ten of sales? But Marvel's Midnight Suns isn't far off and Two Point Campus is due this year.

So yea no CRPG or WRPGs. Dying light is far from an rpg as is forbidden west. Forsaken is a JRPG like FF.
Grand Turismo is the only racing game they have at this point and its not third party is it.

Civ and Stellaris were years ago , where are the new strategy game ? Gears of war tactics sold very well and was popular on game pass same with AOE . Not sure what you consider midnight suns , doesn't seem like much of stragey game , reminds me of the beatem ups from the ps2 era from marvel. Two point campus is a simulation game like theme park right ?

The claim is that third parties pick up the slack but they actually don't.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

So yea no CRPG or WRPGs. Dying light is far from an rpg as is forbidden west. Forsaken is a JRPG like FF.

What about Elden Ring, ELEX, Spellforce III, or Relayer? All due in the next 10 weeks. There are about 30-40 RPGs slated for released on PlayStation this year. You can see upcoming games in the Store on your PlayStation. Just look there.

Grand Turismo is the only racing game they have at this point and its not third party is it.

Has it occurred to you that the reason racers from third parties have declined is because both Microsoft and Sony provide pretty damn good offerings, combined with the demand for racers having plummeted over the last 15 years.

Civ and Stellaris were years ago , where are the new strategy game ? Gears of war tactics sold very well and was popular on game pass same with AOE . Not sure what you consider midnight suns , doesn't seem like much of stragey game

Gears of War Tactics was also "years" (plural) - ago, almost two in fact. Stellaris has had two massive updates on console since then and Stellaris is the type of games where the mechanics and game get re-invented frequently. I've been playing Stellaris since released and it's a very different strategy game from what it is.

Marvel's Midnight Suns is a tactical game, it requires strategy.

The claim is that third parties pick up the slack but they actually don't.

If there was a tremendous demand for games and third parties weren't providing it you could argue there is slack. But where is there evidence of a demand of these games that is not already being met? You could argue that there is a dearth of bowling simulators. There is, but to demonstrate 'slack' you need to evidence demand first.

 

[eastmen]

What about Elden Ring, ELEX, Spellforce III, or Relayer? All due in the next 10 weeks. There are about 30-40 RPGs slated for released on PlayStation this year. You can see upcoming games in the Store on your PlayStation. Just look there.


Has it occurred to you that the reason racers from third parties have declined is because both Microsoft and Sony provide pretty damn good offerings, combined with the demand for racers having plummeted over the last 15 years.


Gears of War Tactics was also "years" (plural) - ago, almost two in fact. Stellaris has had two massive updates on console since then and Stellaris is the type of games where the mechanics and game get re-invented frequently. I've been playing Stellaris since released and it's a very different strategy game from what it is.

Marvel's Midnight Suns is a tactical game, it requires strategy.


If there was a tremendous demand for games and third parties weren't providing it you could argue there is slack. But where is there evidence of a demand of these games that is not already being met? You could argue that there is a dearth of bowling simulators. There is, but to demonstrate 'slack' you need to evidence demand first.

Since when has Elden Ring been an RPG ? What is the role playing there ? I don't know about spellforce or relayer I will have to look them up. Are you just lumping games with item and skill level ups as RPGs ? Then is grand turismo an rpg ? You level up the cars you can get by adding new equipment and you can buy better cars for better performance.

For racers perhaps on the Microsoft side but GT is only track racer. Where are the street racers from third parties
Stellaris is a 6 year old game. Is that the best we got ? I'll have to look into midnight suns a bit more. The trailer was terrible so I kinda zoned out on it.

The demand is here. Look at the people crying foul that fallout and elder scrolls wont be on playstation anymore. There is a yearning for other types of games.

It's why I have said that sony should be looking at companies to purchase to fill in the gaps of their line up. Buying more studios who make similar games to what they already produce would be silly imo. It's what the thread is about.

You said that what sony doesn't make third parties make but then you throw out sony games . Its bizzarro to me

 

[Remij]

I think Sony's immediate plan is to simply continue to do what they are doing. Buying up smaller studios, and building them up in various ways. Either as support/port studios (Nixxes) or perhaps given the right conditions, expanded and given AAA titles to produce (BluePoint Games)

At the end of the day, I feel like the big play for these companies is to have enough studios to continually be pumping out game after game on a monthly/bi-monthly basis. Microsoft's pockets are big enough that they can easily buy entire publisher and then take the whole thing under their wing.. whereas Sony has to be smarter and make more calculated additions. If they can get a major Japanese publisher on board like SE or Capcom, then that would be amazing for them. I believe that will happen eventually. It just makes sense.

I think they should continue to pursue small teams that are proficient in porting to PC. I think considering how good the God of War PC port is (and how great they are supporting it post launch so far.. 4 patches in less than 1 month)... they should consider expanding that relationship.

They're also working with Iron Galaxy with the Uncharted Collection for PC... perhaps they should consider purchasing them as well. Iron Galaxy had taken over continued development of Killer Instinct from Double Helix, and proven themselves to be quite capable in the fighting game genre. If I'm Sony, I'm looking at getting a wide range of developers with experience in all types of genres. It wouldn't hurt to have a good fighting game developer in the roster.

It seems to me like Sony already anticipated Call of Duty not being "guaranteed" in the future... last year they announced a partnership with Deviation Games.. a team with ex-Treyarch guys who are supposed to be working on a new multiplayer IP for Sony. Seems to me that Sony would be very interested in having a new shooter IP to potentially lessen that blow.

I have a feeling Disney or some other company will eventually gobble Sony up.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

Since when has Elden Ring been an RPG ? What is the role playing there ? I don't know about spellforce or relayer I will have to look them up. Are you just lumping games with item and skill level ups as RPGs ? Then is grand turismo an rpg ? You level up the cars you can get by adding new equipment and you can buy better cars for better performance.

I think a lot of people started to label everything RPG as long as it has some perks that you can unlock by gaining experience. I blame Ubisoft for that as that bastartized open world games and RPG genre last gen.

The demand is here. Look at the people crying foul that fallout and elder scrolls wont be on playstation anymore. There is a yearning for other types of games.

The effects of MS purchases and the power MS first party we will see in the future. A lot of people expect immediate results.

In addition to that there are "elite" genres and there are others. Due to last gen it just happened that third person action games are the elite genre of the game and everything else. There is no reason to debate that and it is kinda off-topic anyway.

Considering that Sony created M&A team and even hired a bunch of people some time ago (or even former Salesforce guy who oversaw Slack acquisition) I wonder whether they are planning for a big acquisition or not. Though it might not necessary means for gaming division.

I think Sony's immediate plan is to simply continue to do what they are doing. Buying up smaller studios, and building them up in various ways. Either as support/port studios (Nixxes) or perhaps given the right conditions, expanded and given AAA titles to produce (BluePoint Games)

Acquisiton of Nixxes was an interesting case as they bought the studio that Square Enix mainly used. for porting their games on PC. And also those two years moneyhats that Sony did for Square Enix were also quite odd and I think that proves that they are not planning to acquire Square at all.
I remember they hired former Capcom president too, but I don't see them acquiring Capcom either.

 

[Remij]

Acquisiton of Nixxes was an interesting case as they bought the studio that Square Enix mainly used. for porting their games on PC. And also those two years moneyhats that Sony did for Square Enix were also quite odd and I think that proves that they are not planning to acquire Square at all.
I remember they hired former Capcom president too, but I don't see them acquiring Capcom either.

That's a fair point about SquareEnix that I didn't really consider.

I dunno though... I feel they have to make a play for one or the other at some point. If not for anything else, but to keep some other company like Meta, Amazon, Apple, or Google snatching them up and then putting them on Metaverse stuff... Remember, it's not just about owning them... it's about making sure that nobody else can buy them out from under you. That's why it makes sense despite the fact that SquareEnix and Capcom games will always release on Playstation because that's where the majority of their sales come from.. and games like Final Fantasy and Resident Evil are already closely associated with Playstation.

I think MS is smart to be making these somewhat pre-emptive moves grabbing these IPs and developers... because at some point, when those companies get really SERIOUS about this stuff.. there's going to be a LOT of money thrown around. MS seems to be accurately reading the signs and is building up, so as to not be caught off guard.

It's best for Sony to acquire what they can, because even if they do end up being gobbled up by one of the bigger companies eventually.. they'll be able to grab a much higher offer when the time comes.

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

I feel they have to make a play for one or the other at some point. If not for anything else, but to keep some other company like Meta, Amazon, Apple, or Google snatching them up and then putting them on Metaverse stuff. It's about making sure that nobody else can buy them out from under you. That's why it makes sense despite the fact that SquareEnix and Capcom games will always release on Playstation because that's where the majority of their sales come from

Sony won't fight those giants. Sony just can't afford that as for tech giants any publisher (ironically ATVI was the biggest one) is nothing on the balance sheet as 10-15b are not even that important. Sony did not even win against Tencent regarding Leyou. Sony consists of several companies and I am pretty sure that other divisions won't suddenly say that they should invest everything they have in gaming and abandon other divisions. I just don't see that, unlike tech giants for whom 10-15b acquisition is a sum that can be written off if the investment did not work out. (Funnily people thought about MS the same way, but MS happened to be rather persistent in home console space. Hail Phil for saving Xbox after Xbox One though)

I have mixed feelings regarding other tech giants. On the one hand if one of them grabs another publisher, it will be easier for MS to acquire something else. On the another hand the tech giant won't enter the home console market and more likely to get a publisher for VR (mainly Facebook) or some other stuff. But at the same time, with the possibility of the resurgence of the handheld market somebody might be interested in owning a publisher (Apple handheld for example).

All existing western big publishers have various internal issues

• Ubisoft is the most vulnerable one as they seem not only had internal issues like ATVI, but also trying stuff like NFT, pivot to F2P and so on as if don't know what to do
  
• EA ran Need for Speed, Battlefield into the ground and I have no hope that they will be able to produce quality content. It feels like they are going into ATVI trap. They did make big acquisitions so I don't see them being bought in the near future. Mobile studio, Codemasters. Main cashcow is FIFA but unlike COD, FIFA is a licensed franchise.
  
• T2 is literally GTA Online machine. They also got Zynga which was a huge acquisition. They are becoming almost ATVI but with less teams and less active IPs I guess? GTA is extremely important though.
  
• WB is in limbo. No idea what is happening there but all their studios - aside NR - had abysmal output for some reason and finally seem to be read to release something after many many years

On the east

• Square Enix is the odd one that throws its western division under the bus and it seems more interested in the immediate profit, rather than growing their franchises. They basically depend on FF14 and moneyhats at this point
  
• Bamco is doing fine on all the stuff they produce using licenses
• Konami is doing whatever but find some success accidentally
  
• Sega is strange. Atlus is doing whatever, other japanese teams do whatever, RCG is fine though. Western part is good though. In addition to that Sega did a lot of restructuring over the past years. Maybe gearing towards selling Sega Corp.? Though Sega claimed that they plan to buy somebody.
  
• Capcom found great success in Monster Hunter franchise which at this point overshadows every other IP. But unlike certain somebody they are not pivoting to make only the games for that franchise and started to make stuff like VR games too and release the games from other IPs

I think MS is right to be making these somewhat pre-emptive moves grabbing these IPs and developers... because at some point, when those companies get really SERIOUS about this stuff.

They are doing that because they learnt from both Netflix and Disney. Netflix built a foundation for the streaming services and became a household name in that. People associate TV streaming with Netflix. However Netflix grew using licensed IPs and as streaming became lucrative, a lot of other streaming services popped up and they decided to stream their stuff themselves thus they remove all their stuff from Netflix. And Netflix had to pivot towards homegrown IPs. Disney had a meteoric original rise due to sheer stash of IPs they own (and all the acqusitions they made like Pixar, Lucasfilms, Fox etc.). They literally a house of famous IP. However when you are not the first to the market, you are not considered the household name. Disney still has some recognition but people still "watch Netflix" rather than "watch Disney+".

So Microsoft is collecting IPs in advance. Bethesda gave bunch of IPs and MS jumped on the first opportunity to grab ATVI as not only it provides a foothold in various markets, it gives legendary IPs and Blizzard is a treasure trove of talent. They might be interested in Sega purely from IP standpoint though.

Unlike Sony, Microsoft has a strategic plan (vision) and infrastructure in place thus you can think of something regarding what they are gonna do. With Sony it is hard to say. I stick to idea that Sony won't grab anybody big, won't compete with the tech giants and will continue time exclusivity policy and so on. A lot depends on how the Spartacus service is gonna look like. After that we can think of some ideas for their future growth.

 

[PSman1700]

Sony should do timesplitters and Goldeneye for PS.

 

[eastmen]

For everyone bringing up ubisoft , didn't another company try a hostal take over and now owns a sizable amount of ubi ? I think that would shelter them from a purchase

 

[arandomguy]

The focus is on Sony but some of the above discussion does bring up the interesting idea that Microsoft's actions could be preempting the likes of the Amazon, Apple, Facebook, or Google (maybe even Netflix and Tencent).

For everyone bringing up ubisoft , didn't another company try a hostal take over and now owns a sizable amount of ubi ? I think that would shelter them from a purchase

Vivendi (who interestingly was the largest holder of Blizzard and later Activison Blizzard) tried that but I believe already divested almost all their stake in Ubisoft after the failed attempt.

But from that it seemed Ubisoft was very against being acquired by anyone, at least back then.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

Since when has Elden Ring been an RPG ? What is the role playing there ? I don't know about spellforce or relayer I will have to look them up. Are you just lumping games with item and skill level ups as RPGs ? Then is grand turismo an rpg ? You level up the cars you can get by adding new equipment and you can buy better cars for better performance.

I am follow how the industry defines game genres. Elden Ring describes itself as an RPG. This is how it is marketed and how it is being covered. I've not seen anybody question whether it's an RPG apart from you, just now. Maybe you could clearly define what you mean by CRPG and WRPG. What features and mechanics need to be included, what shouldn't.

For racers perhaps on the Microsoft side but GT is only track racer. Where are the street racers from third parties
Stellaris is a 6 year old game. Is that the best we got ? I'll have to look into midnight suns a bit more. The trailer was terrible so I kinda zoned out on it.

Dirt 5 seems is already a popular off-road/track racer, and coming out this year in that genre are WRC 11, Monster Energy Supercross 5, and MX vs ATV Legends. Need for Speed 2022 is a street racer and other racers out on console this year are Grid Legends, Assetto Corsa Competizione, F1 2022 and Test Drive Unlimited Solar Crown.

You said that what sony doesn't make third parties make but then you throw out sony games . Its bizzarro to me

I said nothing like this, what are you talking about. None of the games I've "thrown out" are Sony games. Are you high or was directed at somebody else?

 

[cheapchips]

it seemed Ubisoft was very against being acquired by anyone, at least back then.

EA were giving it a go around 2004. They acquired 20%, but sold that by 2010.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I get your point about third parties and there are a lot of genres that they cater too. But there are some on consoles that are sorely lacking. MS buying up Bethesda completely changed the landscape for RPGS and there aren't many third party strategy games out there anymore.

Yes, they've reduced the library for other platforms, potentially forcing people to have to get an XBox to play a particular genre. Bought relevance. I suppose that'd be an option, to divvy up the market into genres through acquisitions. Sony can buy all the racing developers, MS all the western RPG studios, Sony all the squad-based shooters and MS all the fast-paced shooters. Force everyone into choosing a side, or wastefully buying a redundant piece of hardware. Personally I think that's dumb and I don't see a legitimate argument that structuring the console market this way is good thing for humanity and preferable over what we've had historically (which itself is worse than what could have). I can only hope Sony or anyone else doesn't go looking for a niche and hoovering it up to lock it to their platform, certainly not an established, mulitplatform, available to everyone without paying Sonytax, niche