PC & Video Games

Microsoft buys Activision for $68.7 billion

  • Last Updated:
  • Apr 28th, 2022 6:26 pm
Deal Addict
User avatar
May 31, 2009
1865 posts
758 upvotes
They’d be stupid to remove Call of Duty from PlayStation systems as well. Microsoft still has a win win scenario with Sony owners buying their games and buying all them micro transactions along with it. So I don’t see it going exclusive but maybe Overwatch they could hold back from PS players, but again losing money. Microsoft doesn’t make money on the systems sales but gamepass subscription service seems to be very profitable. Maybe force some them PS players to buy the gamepass for PC gaming or buy a XBox system
[external link removed]
Deal Addict
User avatar
Nov 2, 2012
3380 posts
5051 upvotes
Image

That's a force to be reckoned with.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jun 16, 2009
5576 posts
5795 upvotes
GTA
M1GOmigs wrote: Also speaking of beer, what's the over/under on how many @CFRTim will have tonight? Face With Tears Of Joy
CFRTim wrote: To any gambling person.
I was off work today, so I had an early start. However, I am going back to work tomorrow but the day is still young.
I'm opening up a new bet:
How long until @CFRTim needs a new liver? Face With Open Mouth And Cold Sweat
c'mon get happy!
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jun 16, 2009
5576 posts
5795 upvotes
GTA
aidendanger wrote: If it's on other platforms, that's not exclusive.
Well Other Platforms that support GamePass is still pretty exclusive of PlayStation. GamePass is on Xbox, PC, Android and Apple portable devices. Steam Deck too possibly, but not necessarily as a direct GamePass app, more through it being a portable PC device.
c'mon get happy!
Deal Addict
Aug 4, 2003
1326 posts
276 upvotes
Edmonton
BernardRyder wrote: Well Other Platforms that support GamePass is still pretty exclusive of PlayStation. GamePass is on Xbox, PC, Android and Apple portable devices. Steam Deck too possibly, but not necessarily as a direct GamePass app, more through it being a portable PC device.
Exactly. MS is all about GamePass exclusivity. I don't think it matters where people play the game to them, as long as they subscribe to GamePass.
Deal Fanatic
Feb 21, 2013
5313 posts
2288 upvotes
Toronto
Caerus wrote: Image

That's a force to be reckoned with.
I was just listening to the Bombcast and they brought up an interesting point: do they keep all the Activision Blizzard studios under the same banner? Or do they just allow some of the studios to be their own thing? Like Warcraft/StarCraft/Diablo has always been just Blizzard to me, and so I feel like that will just be its own entity. But what about IW/Treyarch/Sledgehammer/Raven/Neversoft/Toys for Bob etc? Will they just be their own individual studios under the Xbox banner? Will the COD devs remain under the Activision banner?

You have to think that the Activision namebrand carries with it a few stigmas right now too. First there's the obvious one about sexual harrassment... But beyond that, the brand has becoming known for basically being a company that only made iterations of the same game - COD and at one point Guitar Hero. It seemed like a place that didn't care to innovate, but this is an opportunity for some of those substudios to finally get some shine.
Gear: Fujifilm X-Pro2 | Canon A-1
Deal Addict
User avatar
Nov 2, 2012
3380 posts
5051 upvotes
M1GOmigs wrote: I was just listening to the Bombcast and they brought up an interesting point: do they keep all the Activision Blizzard studios under the same banner? Or do they just allow some of the studios to be their own thing? Like Warcraft/StarCraft/Diablo has always been just Blizzard to me, and so I feel like that will just be its own entity. But what about IW/Treyarch/Sledgehammer/Raven/Neversoft/Toys for Bob etc? Will they just be their own individual studios under the Xbox banner? Will the COD devs remain under the Activision banner?

You have to think that the Activision namebrand carries with it a few stigmas right now too. First there's the obvious one about sexual harrassment... But beyond that, the brand has becoming known for basically being a company that only made iterations of the same game - COD and at one point Guitar Hero. It seemed like a place that didn't care to innovate, but this is an opportunity for some of those substudios to finally get some shine.
If the Activision name took a back seat for a while or permanently wouldn't be surprising. They already hid it with the most recent release of COD. Maybe there might even be a rebranding of the teams under a COD type of banner, like 343i or The Coalition. But would cover all the teams working under it. Who knows, they might even consolidate some of the teams for COD, and open up some other studios to make other games. Back in the day it used to just be Infinity Ward.

The Activision name itself like you mentioned, has stigmas and is probably the low point. I don't see the Activision name as anything special these days. When you hear COD you know how big it is. When you hear Blizzard you know what to expect.

I think with how Phil has approached things so far, he'd let them do their thing and not micromanage all that much. None of them would lose their identity. Blizzard will still be Blizzard doing their thing. Just like all the other studios though, they're under the XGS umbrella. But if they axed the Activision name when Bobby gets the boot would be completely fine with me.
Temp. Banned
Apr 15, 2011
5157 posts
1887 upvotes
Scarborough
At the rate things are going, Sony might just cave and allow gamepass on their system. So it's not all bad for ps5 owners. They're probably drooling at the thought of it. I mean getting halo, forza, cod, gears of War, the Bethesda games, plus their own first party games. I think MS would agree to it after some details are worked out. It doesn't seem like MS cares about hardware all that much, though personally I'd still pick up the xbox anyway if it's offered, just because the hardware is usually the best. They might even get Sony to agree to port some of their own games to gamepass. GP will probably be more expensive on the ps5 though, to make up for royalty fees and such.

That's one scenario. Another more likely scenario is MS takes all these games exclusive and Sony just decides to continue building their own IP, their own service while hoping their fans don't jump ship in the mean time.

The last scenario is MS allows the games to continue being on PS5 while bringing the best version of their games to their own service on day 1. This would make sense to me from a revenue perspective.
Deal Fanatic
Dec 28, 2007
5134 posts
3918 upvotes
Microsoft owns Leisure Suit Larry now.

Sony is doomed.

Sony had two silver bullets. One is backward compatibility and the other is Japanese games, and Jimbo Ryan threw them both into the trash can.
[OP]
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Feb 28, 2006
8417 posts
1862 upvotes
Richmond Hill
I doubt MS spent $68,7 billion to share their games. I suspect it will be something like Bethesda where current released and signed upcoming games will be released on Playstation and other platforms but new games/IPs will be exclusive to Xbox/PC.

They played around with the wording initially when they bought Bethesda and this is probably the same. Their end goal is to increase GP subscribers and I don't see a bigger appeal than making Activision/Bethesda games exclusive to the streaming service.
Deal Fanatic
Dec 12, 2006
5924 posts
1716 upvotes
calgary
Im still not sure what to make of this move, Activision is such a weird cultural fit to what Microsoft has built with XGS.
Activision/Blizzard was one of the few companies left who structured their business off of a dated retail based business model which couldn't be further from where Microsoft is with gamepass.

The combination Treyarch, Raven, High Moon, Beenox, Sledgehammer games, Infinity Ward and Demonware all just primarily work together to crank out yearly Call of Duty releases.

Those are all supremely talented studios...
Will Microsoft axe the yearly Call of Duty release schedule and give some of these studios the autonomy to go and build their own games well they continue to develop Warzone/Zombies/TDM as GAAS titles?
Or will it be the status quo... keep cranking out yearly Call of Duty titles and we will throw them on gamepass? I'm skeptical that they'd pay 68 billion to turnaround and ditch one of the big cash cows.

Blizzard seems like a better fit with games like Overwatch and Diablo but what happens to World of Warcraft? I have to assume that would get folded into gamepass at some point but that requires its own subscription.
A game like Overwatch 2 as a console exclusive day one on gamepass seems like a great way to drive people towards gamepass.
Deal Fanatic
Feb 21, 2013
5313 posts
2288 upvotes
Toronto
SpicYMchaggis wrote: Im still not sure what to make of this move, Activision is such a weird cultural fit to what Microsoft has built with XGS.
Activision/Blizzard was one of the few companies left who structured their business off of a dated retail based business model which couldn't be further from where Microsoft is with gamepass.

The combination Treyarch, Raven, High Moon, Beenox, Sledgehammer games, Infinity Ward and Demonware all just primarily work together to crank out yearly Call of Duty releases.

Those are all supremely talented studios...
Will Microsoft axe the yearly Call of Duty release schedule and give some of these studios the autonomy to go and build their own games well they continue to develop Warzone/Zombies/TDM as GAAS titles?
Or will it be the status quo... keep cranking out yearly Call of Duty titles and we will throw them on gamepass? I'm skeptical that they'd pay 68 billion to turnaround and ditch one of the big cash cows.

Blizzard seems like a better fit with games like Overwatch and Diablo but what happens to World of Warcraft? I have to assume that would get folded into gamepass at some point but that requires its own subscription.
A game like Overwatch 2 as a console exclusive day one on gamepass seems like a great way to drive people towards gamepass.
TBH I think the right thing with COD would be to follow the Games as a Service platform, and split it into two base games, and build out campaign expansions/DLCs to flesh out the story every year. Keep maybe two different variations of the Multiplayer (Boots on ground ie Modern Warfare/WW2 and Jetpacks ie Black Ops/Advanced Warfare/Infinite Warfare). That way they've got franchises to fit both styles. And then assign their various COD substudios to each.

This also ensures that from a casual online, competitive esports and f2p warzone perspective, the game can be consistent across multiple years, and they only have to consider new maps and modes and weapons, instead of totally rebuilding the game and tweaking the engine every year and having to squash the same bugs each time. It's what they're doing for Halo Infinite, it's what Destiny is already doing, so it would also make sense here.
Gear: Fujifilm X-Pro2 | Canon A-1
Deal Fanatic
Dec 28, 2007
5134 posts
3918 upvotes
Everything that are already out or coming out prior to the official take over will be multiplatform. Anything new and/or coming out after the take over will be exclusive.

There is way more money in subscriptions than selling CoD on PlayStation. If CoD shows up on PS5 it will be on the PS5 Gamepass app.

Sony is the traditional cable company and MS is Netflix. Once the majority consumers are accepting the subscription service model Sony will be begging MS to put TLoU 3 on Gamepass.
Deal Guru
Feb 11, 2007
10007 posts
4390 upvotes
Microsoft is one of two $2.5 + trillion dollar companies in the world, and their biggest source of revenue is from Cloud computing services (38%).

The games will be exclusive because it takes away the 30% revenue cut Sony would get from Microsoft or Activision/Blizzard on the sale of each PS5 software sold.

Image

WL1980 wrote: Everything that are already out or coming out prior to the official take over will be multiplatform. Anything new and/or coming out after the take over will be exclusive.

There is way more money in subscriptions than selling CoD on PlayStation. If CoD shows up on PS5 it will be on the PS5 Gamepass app.

Sony is the traditional cable company and MS is Netflix. Once the majority consumers are accepting the subscription service model Sony will be begging MS to put TLoU 3 on Gamepass.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jun 16, 2009
5576 posts
5795 upvotes
GTA
I'm not sure why Activision going Xbox exclusive is even a question. The argument that CoD will be cross-platform because they would leave money on the table makes no sense.

Microsoft has so much money that it already owns the table, and is already in negotiations for the house.
c'mon get happy!
Deal Addict
Jul 31, 2007
1041 posts
908 upvotes
blaznazn22 wrote: At the rate things are going, Sony might just cave and allow gamepass on their system.
Microsoft has the upper hand now; the only way i see this happening is if Sony agrees to port their exclusives on game pass for Xbox or PC. And not just MLB The Show: games like Horizon FW, God of War Ragnarok, etc. on game pass. Hell will probably freeze over at this point Face With Tears Of Joy
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jun 16, 2009
5576 posts
5795 upvotes
GTA
US Government announces it will be looking at merger guidelines
https://www.gamesradar.com/hours-after- ... uidelines/

The announcement happened to coincide hours after MS's announcement. If rules are changed, it could affect the deal, but would have to happen before the announced 2023 date.
I don't see anything happening from the US side. Europe, on the other hand?
c'mon get happy!
Temp. Banned
Apr 15, 2011
5157 posts
1887 upvotes
Scarborough
BernardRyder wrote: US Government announces it will be looking at merger guidelines
https://www.gamesradar.com/hours-after- ... uidelines/

The announcement happened to coincide hours after MS's announcement. If rules are changed, it could affect the deal, but would have to happen before the announced 2023 date.
I don't see anything happening from the US side. Europe, on the other hand?
The US are a laughing stock. They allowed crypto ponzi schemes to proliferate for the last 12 years unchecked yet now they want to regulate a gaming company purchase? One would think a digital currency ponzi scheme would be the more critical thing to regulate instead of a freaking game company purchase. Uncle Sam acting a fool as usual needs to stay in his lane.

Top