What should Sony's Acquisition Plans Be? *spawn*
- Thread starter RDGoodla
- Start date
Until someone comes and drops 20B in stacks on them and buys them
ChuckeRearmed
Regular
Too big premium. It is like 100% premium. Capcom won't be bought more than 10-12b at most.
Still considering that talks about Activision started three months ago, I think it was certainly shocking for Sony.
To help keep discussions on point, here's a breakdown of threads and topics:
To assist in directing the discussions, the Microsoft Acquisition Rumors thread is temporarily closed and the Microsoft Acquisition of Zenimax is closed since it's an old topic with nothing new coming about.
- https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/what-should-sonys-acquisition-plans-be-spawn.62704/ - For discussing Sony's Acquisitions Plans or what you think they should be
- https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/...e-possibly-completes-2022-07-to-2023-06.62702 - For discussing Microsoft's Acquisition of Activision Blizzard
- https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/microsoft-rumored-to-be-buying-2020-04-2020-07-2020-11.61697 - For discussing rumors of new Microsoft Acquisitions
To assist in directing the discussions, the Microsoft Acquisition Rumors thread is temporarily closed and the Microsoft Acquisition of Zenimax is closed since it's an old topic with nothing new coming about.
I mean, sure, it comes down to taste. The industry, in general, does not share your tastes. On console the reputation of the Sony game brands is much much better. God of War, The Last of Us, Horizon, Ghosts of Tsushima, Spiderman eclipse pretty much anything Microsoft is offering right now. The upcoming Wolverine game will be huge. I was a huge 360 fan, and less so an Xbox One fan. I have not owned a Playstation since PS3, which I did not like. But it's brutally apparent to me that the reputation of the xbox game brands is not good outside of niche titles. Their strongest brand right now is probably ... Forza? The lustre is gone from franchises like Halo and Gears. It may be what you like, but overall I'd say it's not what the market likes relative to what Sony is putting out, and the acclaim it gets. Bethesda and Activision could turn that around, assuming we don't get Fallout 4 level disasters from bethesda, blizzard actually starts releasing games and the cod devs can put the franchise back on track and maybe put out some new games given the freedom.
So does Sony just need to go out and buy up a large publisher? I don't actually think so. Maybe some quality studios. But buying out Ubisoft or something would just be inheriting a lot of problems and a lot of games that are not being well received anymore. I just think Sony is really selective, because they want quality over quantity. They buy partners they like to work with that have a track record.
Except it doesn't always translate into better sales. The xbox 360 sold as well as the ps3 dispite not having those franchises.
As for microsofts strong brands you got sea of thieves , halo , gears , forza and many more. All are selling extremely well xbox and steam.
I notice all the franchises you listed are the same type of game. Third person action game. Pretty one note there.
We could talk all day about how the sony franchises are all third-person story-driven single-player games, but they're critically acclaimed and they sell. God of War is about 20+ million, Spider-man 15+, Ghosts of Tsushima 10+, Horizon Zero Dawn 10+, Spider-man miles morales 6.5+, Last of Us 2 is at least 5 million. These are recent games. They have Wolverine, God of War 2 and Horizon 2 on the way. They'll be big games. Big in a way that the Microsoft games are generally not anymore. Only thing hurting Sony right now is hardware supply constraints. I just don't see any reason for Sony to panic and buy up a bunch of studios that produce games they don't need.
iceberg187
Regular
I would wager that all of those games and the venn diagram for the buyers of those games is a relatively round circle. There are over 120 million ps4 consoles out there so what you are also saying is that there are over 100 million people that never bought Sony's highest selling game yet owns a ps4. So, roughly, 1/6th of Sony's base shows up for their games. The other 5/6 is for third party games. Ps4 success is not on the back of 1st party alone. Only Nintendo has shown ability to sell a console with just their software primarily. So, Sony does need those games because 20 million isn't enough for God of War, 10 million isn't enough for Horizon Zero Dawn.
ChuckeRearmed
Regular
(Spider-man aside), Keep in mind that they represent only 10-15% of all PS4 consoles sold. And won't be suprised that they represent the same folks over and over again buying first party. Basically around 20% probably are those who buy exclusive games.
One thing is for sure, the news media cycle both online and live broadcast, are eating Sony alive. Most of it's hyperbolic, but some having valid opinions and concerns about the future of the PlayStation brand. Whatever the case may be, I'm pretty sure Sony isn't necessarily happy with the current state of things, especially when it comes to the future of securing huge third-party titles and being able to compete against an ever-growing and diverse XB/GamePass game catalog.
Anyone who thinks Sony is 'OK' with the current state things, are just kidding themselves.
Anyone who thinks Sony is 'OK' with the current state things, are just kidding themselves.
I would say it is more important about securing IPs and not letting MS gain ownership than needing Studios at this point
The short duration of the negotiation makes me wonder if it was related to the scandals within the company and the CEO wanting to harvest as soon as possible and get out with a hefty amount of cash before he is kicked out with less.
It also shows how much of determination MS has to own the market.
MS has a tradition of responding with a message, like a psychological warfare towards competition.
Competition does 1 step toward something, MS will do 100 steps ahead towards the same direction and send a message that they dont fucking mess around with them.
The existence of XBOX itself was that, and MS was trying to buy out the big companies that defined the Playstation, from the very beginning but failed. But they do it now only successfully
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I get different types and levels of excitement when going into new, fresher IPs than well-trodden ones. The button-mashy God of War on PS2 and PS3 didn't appeal to me so I skipped those but action-RPG God of War on PS4 is great and for me for fresh and new. You and I are on the same page about Gears and Halo, and I'll to add Ratchet & Clank and any prospect of more Uncharted to that list. I like these franchises but I have got to a point where I've had my fill. I have been playing R&C since the original on PS2, including the PSP outing. I've played a lot of R&C. :|
I've not even started playing Halo Infinite yet, it's just there on my Series X waiting. I wanted to replay Halo 5 first and got my fill of Halo and didn't want to play any more. I'll get around to it but more Halo doesn't excite me any more than more Uncharted.
Developers change features and add new mechanics but the franchises are what they are. The characters, the universes and stories are all known and sometimes I just want something new and unknown to explore. Like Horizon or The Outer Worlds or Ghost of Tsushima. I love going into new games and learning about this whole new worlds, I find this way more engaging. Right now, it feels like Sony are switching up their AAA games more often than Microsoft. But Starfield.. that could be good.
The was discussed in the last DF podcast. I think it was @Dictator who said that Microsoft "could smell blood in the water" given Activision's share price almost halved between May and December 2021 and the endless bad press. It was a good time to strike.
Last edited by a moderator:
ChuckeRearmed
Regular
I think it was mentioned somewhere that exactly those issues allowed MS to go after Activision.
Their main tradition is bleeding money waiting for other side to bleed more
Last edited:
Though I agree with you about your impression of MS's current top franchises I don't think that matters at all anymore because of Gamepass. The financial incentive to get this to play MS's large portfolio+a lot other games will be so huge that Sony has a *real* issue.
Why should people who switched to a PS4 to play COD or who like a few key titles which are now in MS hands keep playing them on PS? It's not like that the PS5 has reached a critical mass yet and that people couldn't sell it profitable to jump on gamepass. IMHO this looks like the rational choice now *if* your console choice isn't ruled by other factors. PS4 was the rational choice vs. the Xbox One and a lot of the normal player base had no problems switching.
Take 2 spends 12.7 billion buying a company. Why Sony is limited to 5 billion when it’s much bigger than take2?
Yes. However SONY lacks first-person AAA games but Zenimax’s famous games are almost all first-person games, which are complementary to Sony.
Therefore Sony can’t ditch Zenimax games if Sony really had bought Zenimax.
It is really a big misstep of Sony to give up buying Zenimax with 5~6 billion. Sony used to spends 500-600 million and Zenimax which seems much more expensive is the cheapest super publisher Sony can buy.
ChuckeRearmed
Regular
Because Sony is 4 companies (people always think about Sony as a single entity) and unlike T2 that can operate akin Netflix (making money from thin air thus having high revenues), Sony has hardware like cameras, TVs and potentially now cars. These industries cannot be financed in debt unlike software development. It is the reason why Netflix is able to invest more money that it even has - because they are pure service company unlike more grounded industries.
In fact SIE is kinda shackled by other divisions. If they were indepedent, that would have more leeway. But with other divisions options like merging and stocks are more difficult for Sony because they all depend on performance of other divisions (like SIE literally kept afloat other divisions for some time).
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Just to clarify, any industry can be financed with debt. It's pretty common in various industries to borrow (go into debt) in order to fund the startup of a company, expansion of the company, general day to day operations of a company, investment into other companies or acquisitions of other companies. Even companies already in debt can acquire more debt to accomplish these things.
AMD is a prime example of this as they have a long history of being in debt and acquiring more debt to keep operating.
It all depends on the company's credit rating with banks. Basically, "does the company generate enough revenue that they can make the minimum monthly payments for any debt that they accumulate?" Revenue, not profit, as a company can be consistently generating a loss but still be able to borrow money. Again AMD's history.
Regards,
SB
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
If people switch consoles to play Call of Duty, they probably will again as long as Call of Duty has that appeal. I don't know how many people that would be, and we don't know how long Microsoft will be obliged to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. I was surprised that SB was speculating for the entirely of PS5's generation.
Sony own first person shooter IP (Killzone, MAG, Resistance, not to mention Blood & Truth in VR), or could make more. I'm not aware there is a particular defining quality or element that separates Call of Duty or Battlefield, but I've only played some single-player campaigns. Insomniac tweeted about Resistance just a few days back so something may be happening with that.
Last edited by a moderator: