I'm not a business guy, definitely not a finance guy, but this seems like a bad idea for Microsoft. Microsoft is buying a studio that releases cookie cutter games that are only going to get less...
I'm not a business guy, definitely not a finance guy, but this seems like a bad idea for Microsoft.
Microsoft is buying a studio that releases cookie cutter games that are only going to get less popular over time. Yes, these games are juggernauts, and yes they have had a lot of staying power, but they're easily replaced in my opinion. Most people would be pretty happy to switch from Call of Duty if anyone was making a viable alternative.
In addition, whatever Microsoft is doing wrong now, they'll probably keep doing wrong with Activision.
I think Microsoft was smart with gamepass. I also think that bringing together Xbox and PC gaming was brilliant. But if Microsoft wants to pull ahead here, they'll have to start innovating with the actual games that are being put out on Xbox. They probably could have put together dozens of smaller studios with the money they spent on Activision. They could have found the best talent in the industry and let them make whatever they wanted, each with varying budgets up to a billion dollars.
If Xbox was the only console where I could play games like Breath of the Wild, Tears of the Kingdom, The Last of Us, The Outer Wilds, Batman Arkham, Baldur's Gate, etc. then I would buy an Xbox for every room in my house.
Right now, Xbox has by far the least interesting catalogue and the least interesting hardware. This move will do more to kill Activision than it will to help Xbox in my humble opinion.
Most of the people who play COD are more casual gamers. I don't think they are going to shift to a competitor of COD. The Call of Duty name is half the reason they buy it.
Most of the people who play COD are more casual gamers. I don't think they are going to shift to a competitor of COD. The Call of Duty name is half the reason they buy it.
I thinking you're missing the main part of this deal. Microsoft wants King, makers of Candy Crush, so they can push more into mobile games. Call of Duty and Blizzard are just a nice bonus. They...
I thinking you're missing the main part of this deal. Microsoft wants King, makers of Candy Crush, so they can push more into mobile games. Call of Duty and Blizzard are just a nice bonus. They don't care any more about Xbox. They will sell you want one if you really want one. They only care about software. Something that is apparently going well with Game Pass but Microsoft has struggled on the mobile side.
I don't know that King solves this for them, but that's their main incentive for this deal.
I'm not an FPS guy, but are there really "no viable alternatives" to Call of Duty? My impression is that FPSs are still one of the most popular genres in America. Funnily enough, Microsoft owns...
hese games are juggernauts, and yes they have had a lot of staying power, but they're easily replaced in my opinion. Most people would be pretty happy to switch from Call of Duty if anyone was making a viable alternative.
I'm not an FPS guy, but are there really "no viable alternatives" to Call of Duty? My impression is that FPSs are still one of the most popular genres in America. Funnily enough, Microsoft owns one of those IPs, but it apparently(?) didn't do as well as expected.
Right now, Xbox has by far the least interesting catalogue and the least interesting hardware
These days, it's much less about innovation and having one killer title. There was always some truth to this,, but it's especially true in the 2020's. That's why Sony divested much of the studios behind more experimental titles and focused on this push towards more cinematic-esque titles. Titles that make you feel like you are playing a blockbuster film. They even changed their studio intro to reflect this.
Nintendo still has the most variety, but arguably has also cooled down on new IP development. They have a dozen semi-dormant IPs, so there's simply less incentive to chase brand new IPs.
There really aren't any alternatives to Call of Duty. As Eji1700 pointed out, there are a lot of first person shooters but they don't compete directly with COD. They tend to have a gimmick, very...
There really aren't any alternatives to Call of Duty. As Eji1700 pointed out, there are a lot of first person shooters but they don't compete directly with COD. They tend to have a gimmick, very buggy gameplay, overly complicated loadout/loot systems, etc.
Battlefield was kind of close but even that game had a class/loadout system that kind of wanted people to play a role in their squad (like a medic, sniper, etc.). The gimmick was that they were huge battles with vehicles. Unfortunately, even Battlefield has been horrible for years now.
I think there is plenty of room for a new deathmatch shooter to squeeze in and start stealing market share.
There are definetely alternatives to COD, but for many people COD is a seasonal game like Madden or FIFA. There's no need or want to change anything, just get it every year for a guaranteed...
There are definetely alternatives to COD, but for many people COD is a seasonal game like Madden or FIFA. There's no need or want to change anything, just get it every year for a guaranteed experience.
Candy Crush is still absolutely massive for an audience that Xbox has basically no reach to with their current catalog, so that's a huge part of the deal for them. I also don't think Call of Duty...
Candy Crush is still absolutely massive for an audience that Xbox has basically no reach to with their current catalog, so that's a huge part of the deal for them. I also don't think Call of Duty is going anywhere anytime soon.
It's interesting to hear this opinion here in regards to this. Earlier this week, I saw a video essay about how the AAA games industry is sapping their IPs dry with continual releases, noting that...
It's interesting to hear this opinion here in regards to this. Earlier this week, I saw a video essay about how the AAA games industry is sapping their IPs dry with continual releases, noting that Ubisoft has sucked so much out of Assasin's Creed that their latest iteration is trying to appeal to people who liked the earliest games in the series instead of making something more innovative.
Activision Blizzard is the absolute king of sucking everything they can out of an IP until the entire genre dies out. When's the last time you played something like Guitar Hero or Skylanders or Tony Hawk's Pro Skater? They are at the point right now where they have run out of ideas to do this with. Overwatch is still popular, yeah, but it lost a lot of steam with the crappy things they did when it became Overwatch 2. The latest Diablo release had a lot of people talking about the graphics when it came out but I honestly haven't heard much else about it since, which is a major decline.
But bear in mind that this opinion is from someone who has practically never liked much of the stuff coming from Microsoft's gaming division. Their exclusive games tend to be flashy and gain a lot of hype, but they're very conservatively designed. Everyone was going crazy for Gears of War while I was actually more entertained by the maligned UT3. The thing I played the most out of my Xbox 360 was the backwards compability mode for Panzer Dragoon Orta.
Definitely agree, have yet to see Microsoft really capitalize on their previous acquisitions. Rare is of course the the classic example of a studio bought that became not really half as relevant...
Definitely agree, have yet to see Microsoft really capitalize on their previous acquisitions. Rare is of course the the classic example of a studio bought that became not really half as relevant as they once were.
Activision Blizzard is really a behemoth but it'll be interesting if Microsoft manages to shrink them down. If someone can do it though, it's them. Just look at Starfield. While still the gaming...
Activision Blizzard is really a behemoth but it'll be interesting if Microsoft manages to shrink them down. If someone can do it though, it's them. Just look at Starfield. While still the gaming event of the year, seems like the interest in it has been dwindling after the release (though that might just be my experience compared to Bethesda's earlier games).
Honestly, BG3 and TotK felt like bigger gaming events of the year than Starfield. The former dominated the gaming conversation with "man these games have so much content!" for weeks, while...
Honestly, BG3 and TotK felt like bigger gaming events of the year than Starfield. The former dominated the gaming conversation with "man these games have so much content!" for weeks, while Starfield split the gaming conversation into "this is pretty good" and "this sure is a vanilla Bethesda game without any good mods yet, yawn. It seemed like the controversies about the pronouns mod and the paid DLSS mod were bigger than the game.
That's the problem with a truly new Bethesda IP. People may rarely say they play the games for story and lore, but Elder Scrolls and Fallout each have those in spades. I'm a bit biased since I did...
That's the problem with a truly new Bethesda IP. People may rarely say they play the games for story and lore, but Elder Scrolls and Fallout each have those in spades. I'm a bit biased since I did ignore most of the PR, but even a month out my loose impression (haven't played yet but will soon)... this is Skyrim in space, without the lore. essentially a sci-fi sandbox. I have heard zero fan buzz about the story, nothing good, nothing bad.
So if your game is a sandbox you make your buzz off of whacky shenaningans people post online. Those probably exist (be it intended or unintended interactions) but I also haven't been looking. That was something Bethesda was king of doing back in the day, but the competition is a lot stiffer these days. As you said, TotK came out this year and the things you can do in its sandbox like work is truly breathtaking.
I don't know if that'll be financially sound for Microsoft, but interesting things can happen. Like WoW on the Xbox and a better exploration of the Warcraft franchise as a whole. All things...
I don't know if that'll be financially sound for Microsoft, but interesting things can happen. Like WoW on the Xbox and a better exploration of the Warcraft franchise as a whole.
All things considered, WoW is still the most popular MMORPG. That must have some value.
Also, StarCraft, Hearthstone, Overwatch. They all can thrive if given some love.
Debatable. While third party metrics aren't the most reliable, and Blizzard is very cagey about subscriber counts in recent years, there were definite indications that Final Fantasy XIV handily...
All things considered, WoW is still the most popular MMORPG.
Debatable. While third party metrics aren't the most reliable, and Blizzard is very cagey about subscriber counts in recent years, there were definite indications that Final Fantasy XIV handily passed WoW up. And it's certainly a much more interesting game, anyway.
You are correct, there is no way to say for sure. I do believe World of Warcraft still has a larger player base, but I'm not basing this on any data that was released by Blizzard.
You are correct, there is no way to say for sure. I do believe World of Warcraft still has a larger player base, but I'm not basing this on any data that was released by Blizzard.
Microsoft has completed its acquisition of video game-maker Activision Blizzard for $69 billion, closing one of the most expensive tech acquisitions in history that could have repercussions across the video game industry.
Taking over the studios behind blockbuster games like Call of Duty, Diablo and Overwatch will be a boost for Microsoft’s Xbox gaming console, which ranks third in sales behind PlayStation and Nintendo. The software giant also has bigger ambitions to fold Activision titles into its multi-game subscription service that works something like a Netflix for video games.
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission lost a court bid to pause the deal so that its in-house judge could review it. The FTC hasn’t given up, appealing the decision and last month filing notice of its plan to resume that trial. That signals the U.S. regulator’s intention to unwind the deal even after it closes.
Sorta. CoD has perfected the casual feedback loop. Personally, I hate most of it, but a ton of people eat it up. Other FPS games don't usually even bother to compete directly in that genre, and...
I'm not an FPS guy, but are there really "no viable alternatives" to Call of Duty? My impression is that FPSs are still one of the most popular genres in America.
Sorta. CoD has perfected the casual feedback loop. Personally, I hate most of it, but a ton of people eat it up. Other FPS games don't usually even bother to compete directly in that genre, and instead do things like extraction shooters, battle royals, or other unique niche stuff like titanfall/siege.
If you want to hop into a game, pick a loadout, and do ok even if you're mediocre just because the game balance leads to that, then CoD is a good game (and that's not to say there can't be more to it, but that's why it's so massively popular).
The closest competitor to memory is battlefield, and they haven't exactly had stellar releases recently so that leaves CoD at the top of the pile. The only other thing I've heard pushing into the genre was a roblox/minecraft looking fps that I can't recall the name of, but was basically everything everyone wanted from battlefield.
I'm not a business guy, definitely not a finance guy, but this seems like a bad idea for Microsoft.
Microsoft is buying a studio that releases cookie cutter games that are only going to get less popular over time. Yes, these games are juggernauts, and yes they have had a lot of staying power, but they're easily replaced in my opinion. Most people would be pretty happy to switch from Call of Duty if anyone was making a viable alternative.
In addition, whatever Microsoft is doing wrong now, they'll probably keep doing wrong with Activision.
I think Microsoft was smart with gamepass. I also think that bringing together Xbox and PC gaming was brilliant. But if Microsoft wants to pull ahead here, they'll have to start innovating with the actual games that are being put out on Xbox. They probably could have put together dozens of smaller studios with the money they spent on Activision. They could have found the best talent in the industry and let them make whatever they wanted, each with varying budgets up to a billion dollars.
If Xbox was the only console where I could play games like Breath of the Wild, Tears of the Kingdom, The Last of Us, The Outer Wilds, Batman Arkham, Baldur's Gate, etc. then I would buy an Xbox for every room in my house.
Right now, Xbox has by far the least interesting catalogue and the least interesting hardware. This move will do more to kill Activision than it will to help Xbox in my humble opinion.
Most of the people who play COD are more casual gamers. I don't think they are going to shift to a competitor of COD. The Call of Duty name is half the reason they buy it.
More than half surely. plus King Digital Entertainment is the real money maker and mobile gamers throw money at things
I thinking you're missing the main part of this deal. Microsoft wants King, makers of Candy Crush, so they can push more into mobile games. Call of Duty and Blizzard are just a nice bonus. They don't care any more about Xbox. They will sell you want one if you really want one. They only care about software. Something that is apparently going well with Game Pass but Microsoft has struggled on the mobile side.
I don't know that King solves this for them, but that's their main incentive for this deal.
I'm not an FPS guy, but are there really "no viable alternatives" to Call of Duty? My impression is that FPSs are still one of the most popular genres in America. Funnily enough, Microsoft owns one of those IPs, but it apparently(?) didn't do as well as expected.
These days, it's much less about innovation and having one killer title. There was always some truth to this,, but it's especially true in the 2020's. That's why Sony divested much of the studios behind more experimental titles and focused on this push towards more cinematic-esque titles. Titles that make you feel like you are playing a blockbuster film. They even changed their studio intro to reflect this.
Nintendo still has the most variety, but arguably has also cooled down on new IP development. They have a dozen semi-dormant IPs, so there's simply less incentive to chase brand new IPs.
There really aren't any alternatives to Call of Duty. As Eji1700 pointed out, there are a lot of first person shooters but they don't compete directly with COD. They tend to have a gimmick, very buggy gameplay, overly complicated loadout/loot systems, etc.
Battlefield was kind of close but even that game had a class/loadout system that kind of wanted people to play a role in their squad (like a medic, sniper, etc.). The gimmick was that they were huge battles with vehicles. Unfortunately, even Battlefield has been horrible for years now.
I think there is plenty of room for a new deathmatch shooter to squeeze in and start stealing market share.
There are definetely alternatives to COD, but for many people COD is a seasonal game like Madden or FIFA. There's no need or want to change anything, just get it every year for a guaranteed experience.
Candy Crush is still absolutely massive for an audience that Xbox has basically no reach to with their current catalog, so that's a huge part of the deal for them. I also don't think Call of Duty is going anywhere anytime soon.
I imagine it'll play out like Minecraft. Continued support, less controversy.
It's interesting to hear this opinion here in regards to this. Earlier this week, I saw a video essay about how the AAA games industry is sapping their IPs dry with continual releases, noting that Ubisoft has sucked so much out of Assasin's Creed that their latest iteration is trying to appeal to people who liked the earliest games in the series instead of making something more innovative.
Activision Blizzard is the absolute king of sucking everything they can out of an IP until the entire genre dies out. When's the last time you played something like Guitar Hero or Skylanders or Tony Hawk's Pro Skater? They are at the point right now where they have run out of ideas to do this with. Overwatch is still popular, yeah, but it lost a lot of steam with the crappy things they did when it became Overwatch 2. The latest Diablo release had a lot of people talking about the graphics when it came out but I honestly haven't heard much else about it since, which is a major decline.
But bear in mind that this opinion is from someone who has practically never liked much of the stuff coming from Microsoft's gaming division. Their exclusive games tend to be flashy and gain a lot of hype, but they're very conservatively designed. Everyone was going crazy for Gears of War while I was actually more entertained by the maligned UT3. The thing I played the most out of my Xbox 360 was the backwards compability mode for Panzer Dragoon Orta.
Definitely agree, have yet to see Microsoft really capitalize on their previous acquisitions. Rare is of course the the classic example of a studio bought that became not really half as relevant as they once were.
Minecraft seems to be doing pretty ok.
Activision Blizzard is really a behemoth but it'll be interesting if Microsoft manages to shrink them down. If someone can do it though, it's them. Just look at Starfield. While still the gaming event of the year, seems like the interest in it has been dwindling after the release (though that might just be my experience compared to Bethesda's earlier games).
Honestly, BG3 and TotK felt like bigger gaming events of the year than Starfield. The former dominated the gaming conversation with "man these games have so much content!" for weeks, while Starfield split the gaming conversation into "this is pretty good" and "this sure is a vanilla Bethesda game without any good mods yet, yawn. It seemed like the controversies about the pronouns mod and the paid DLSS mod were bigger than the game.
That's the problem with a truly new Bethesda IP. People may rarely say they play the games for story and lore, but Elder Scrolls and Fallout each have those in spades. I'm a bit biased since I did ignore most of the PR, but even a month out my loose impression (haven't played yet but will soon)... this is Skyrim in space, without the lore. essentially a sci-fi sandbox. I have heard zero fan buzz about the story, nothing good, nothing bad.
So if your game is a sandbox you make your buzz off of whacky shenaningans people post online. Those probably exist (be it intended or unintended interactions) but I also haven't been looking. That was something Bethesda was king of doing back in the day, but the competition is a lot stiffer these days. As you said, TotK came out this year and the things you can do in its sandbox like work is truly breathtaking.
I don't know if that'll be financially sound for Microsoft, but interesting things can happen. Like WoW on the Xbox and a better exploration of the Warcraft franchise as a whole.
All things considered, WoW is still the most popular MMORPG. That must have some value.
Also, StarCraft, Hearthstone, Overwatch. They all can thrive if given some love.
Debatable. While third party metrics aren't the most reliable, and Blizzard is very cagey about subscriber counts in recent years, there were definite indications that Final Fantasy XIV handily passed WoW up. And it's certainly a much more interesting game, anyway.
You are correct, there is no way to say for sure. I do believe World of Warcraft still has a larger player base, but I'm not basing this on any data that was released by Blizzard.
From the article by Kevin Chan and Matt O'Brien:
Sorta. CoD has perfected the casual feedback loop. Personally, I hate most of it, but a ton of people eat it up. Other FPS games don't usually even bother to compete directly in that genre, and instead do things like extraction shooters, battle royals, or other unique niche stuff like titanfall/siege.
If you want to hop into a game, pick a loadout, and do ok even if you're mediocre just because the game balance leads to that, then CoD is a good game (and that's not to say there can't be more to it, but that's why it's so massively popular).
The closest competitor to memory is battlefield, and they haven't exactly had stellar releases recently so that leaves CoD at the top of the pile. The only other thing I've heard pushing into the genre was a roblox/minecraft looking fps that I can't recall the name of, but was basically everything everyone wanted from battlefield.
Battle Bit Remastered?
Yep, that. Thank you!