[Insider Gaming] Activision Purchase Hasn’t Helped Xbox Game Pass, Report Claims

Elios83 said:
The Activision acquisition served just to the purpose of increasing revenues and turning Microsoft into a multiplatform publisher.
For the Xbox brand it was pure poison, the opposite outcome of what their fans expected/wanted.
Click to expand...

But it helped the Microsoft Gaming brand in a BIG way.
 
Last edited:
phil-spencer-xbox-1.gif
 
Who is the worst aquisitioner Embracer Group for bying bunch of studios and selling them a few years later for cheaper price or Micrsosft for wasting 70 billions on Activion to find out it didn't boost GamePass
 
Pandawan said:
Who is the worst aquisitioner Embracer Group for bying bunch of studios and selling them a few years later for cheaper price or Micrsosft for wasting 70 billions on Activion to find out it didn't boost GamePass
Click to expand...

For a corporate POV, Microsoft, easy.

- Biggest aquisition of MS history
- A lot of dirty secrets/tactics were revelaved
- Now shareholders and other divisions will/are paying attention and they WANT results.
 
Rocinante618 said:
I simply don't care lol if it's profitable or not to MS.

Indy, Age of Mythology Remake, Stalker & CoD campaigns for a fraction of the price I would have paid if I had bought a perpetual license was a really good deal for me and in the future I hope MS keeps bleeding money to put high quality AAA ~$70 priced titles day 1 on gamepass.
Click to expand...

That's my stance on it. For the price of 2 games I get a year of quality new releases Day 1.
 
Their new strategy isn't fail-proof, obviously, nothing is. We have to understand that MS had to change the rules of engagement and needed to brute force a switch in how the market works and I think that is what they have been doing — it is the stage we are in right now. It makes no difference what put them in this situation.

You have to make the best of the situation you are in and they already tried playing by the established rules—it didn't work out, so I mean, putting their games on PS isn't an indicator of failure; this is the first time they are trying this, they failed with other strategies, but not this one. If they are successful, the others will be forced to follow, but that remains to be seen and I am afraid, this all depends on a cloud future which they are ready for.
 
sainraja said:
Their new strategy isn't fail-proof, obviously, nothing is. We have to understand that MS had to change the rules of engagement and needed to brute force a switch in how the market works and I think that is what they have been doing — it is the stage we are in right now. It makes no difference what put them in this situation.

You have to make the best of the situation you are in and they already tried playing by the established rules—it didn't work out, so I mean, putting their games on PS isn't an indicator of failure; this is the first time they are trying this, they failed with other strategies, but not this one. If they are successful, the others will be forced to follow, but that remains to be seen and I am afraid, this all depends on a cloud future which they are ready for.
Click to expand...

I was with you until others are forced to follow part. If nintendo and sony do work successfully within the established rules, why do they have to follow ms? There's this cope out there that ms is always leading the way, secretly winning while our eyes say it's losing.
 
Crayon said:
I was with you until others are forced to follow part. If nintendo and sony do work successfully within the established rules, why do they have to follow ms? There's this cope out there that ms is always leading the way, secretly winning while our eyes say it's losing.
Click to expand...
Well, I did say it remains to be seen. They may not follow at all... hard to say right now.
 
They need rethink their strategy, day one is a mistake, a hybrid model like ps plus, is much better, they need a console first approach, not this day one everywhere nonsense, carry on like this, they will be out of the console business soon enough.
 
onnextflix5 said:
They need rethink their strategy, day one is a mistake, a hybrid model like ps plus, is much better, they need a console first approach, not this day one everywhere nonsense, carry on like this, they will be out of the console business soon enough.
Click to expand...
It eventually can work once they buyout some more big pubs and own most gamings ip/catalogs outside of nintendo and sony where the only way to play them will be on gamepass at that point they will long be out of the console business though.
 
it just add value to the xbox studio by adding ton of fully established ip that they failed to generate by themself.
 
sainraja said:
You have to make the best of the situation you are in and they already tried playing by the established rules
Click to expand...
Buying Activision was out of the 'established rules' playbook? I don't think so, the acquisitions were an example of trying to disrupt established rules. My point being this isn't so much a new strategy as a new.. new.. strategy. It's beyond me why they don't have new management.
 
Ashamam said:
Buying Activision was out of the 'established rules' playbook? I don't think so, the acquisitions were an example of trying to disrupt established rules. My point being this isn't so much a new strategy as a new.. new.. strategy. It's beyond me why they don't have new management.
Click to expand...
Re-read my post. I am saying exactly that. I didn't mention acquisitions specifically but it is an action they have taken to support this new strategy. I was referring to their strategy of putting their games on all available platforms, including competing ones.
 
Last edited:
They call it a Hail Mary for a reason.

They've given up against the consoles and their new plan it to replace Steam.

You can't make this shit up.

I almost feel sorry for them. They are a huge game company that just can't find their footing. The market has rejected them so they are trying to change the market. It's pretty pathetic. Does anyone think their Steam replacement strategy is a winning one? Their best and likely most successful option is to subsist and bide their time.
 
Last edited:
Zacfoldor said:
I almost feel sorry for them. They are a huge game company that just can't find their footing. The market has rejected them so they are trying to change the market. It's pretty pathetic. Does anyone think their Steam replacement strategy is a winning one? Their best and likely most successful option is to subsist and bide their time.
Click to expand...
MS is not really a game company. They just fuck around in gaming because they can...and never have to find out anything. And if you feel sorry for a corporation which makes 88billion profit a year....i feel sorry for you. :messenger_winking_tongue:
 
No one should be surprised here. First, they overpaid for Activision by quite a bit. Second, the premise in which the purchased it wasn't a favorable one for Microsoft. No CoD exclusivity? That's a dealbreaker and should have been a line Microsoft refused to cross.

Without selling more Xbox units, they weren't going to expand GamePass. They couldn't make CoD exclusive, but they should have at least been aggressive about bundling CoD with Xbox to spur buys. It's really the only console system seller that ABK has, which is why it's a headscratcher for this to have been the purchase.

You could have gotten a lot more for less through other companies. CDPR, Capcom, or even T2.
 
They've done nothing to improve any of the brands they've acquired.

Why is Cod for instance pushing more stupid bundles than it did before the acquisition? Bobby the goblin is gone, the parasitic shareholders are gone. They should be focusing on improving the dire quality of the games.
 
Last edited:
Everyone with an xbox already had gamepass.

Then they don't even seem to want to sell xboxs.

How could the purchase increase gamepass? It doesn't add up
 
HeisenbergFX4 said:
In terms of boosting gamepass numbers or even sales of consoles yeah

As an investment of getting all the revenue from everything ABK makes is a different story
Click to expand...
I said it in another thread but the price they paid factors in the increase in revenue. So just adding on whatever Activision was doing doesn't actually help them because they paid for it.

What matters is if Activision is a growth driver of their business. Articles like this heavily imply that so far it is not. Of course future COD shit will come out, but that is where it gets tricky as MS got handed a near complete game and now they need to start actually funding and managing this franchise directly.
 
diffusionx said:
I said it in another thread but the price they paid factors in the increase in revenue. So just adding on whatever Activision was doing doesn't actually help them because they paid for it.

What matters is if Activision is a growth driver of their business. Articles like this heavily imply that so far it is not. Of course future COD shit will come out, but that is where it gets tricky as MS got handed a near complete game and now they need to start actually funding and managing this franchise directly.
Click to expand...
ABK always made tons of money the question is will MS fuck them up which they don't have a great track record managing their studios of late

And yeah the price they paid factors in revenue as they don't expect to recoup that money in a year, its how long term investing works
 
ValiantInstance said:
They've done nothing to improve any of the brands they've acquired.

Why is Cod for instance pushing more stupid bundles than it did before the acquisition? Bobby the goblin is gone, the parasitic shareholders are gone. They should be focusing on improving the dire quality of the games.
Click to expand...
Because its typical not how it works. Acquiring studios by bigger companies is usually just taking the pressure off the bought studios to be commercially successful. Imho this doesnt lead to more quality or better products. Ofc exemptions are the rule. But what I have seen the last 25 years in gaming was a lot more studios were dying after being taken over by bigger fish than the other way around.
 
HeisenbergFX4 said:
ABK always made tons of money the question is will MS fuck them up which they don't have a great track record managing their studios of late

And yeah the price they paid factors in revenue as they don't expect to recoup that money in a year, its how long term investing works
Click to expand...
Personally my worry is that MS has too many studios on its hands. It seems extremely difficult, if not possible, to manage all that. MS struggled with managing the few studios they had, how is it possible for them to manage those, plus some additional studios, plus two of the biggest publishers on the planet. Seems like a exercise in futility.
 
Enjoy it while it lasts Xbox Bros.

Ms is going to erode gamepass to zero value over the next few years. It's a failed experiment. Phil will be working for tencent by 2030.
 
Zacfoldor said:
They've given up against the consoles and their new plan it to replace Steam.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's their plan. Their plan is to become a third-party for Steam, while releasing hardware that is just another third-party Steam box where Valve still gets all the software proceeds. They will just use the Xbox moniker to help sell hardware, for whatever good that will still do.

Xbox is dead. Xbox, like PlayStation and Nintendo, exist for that closed ecosystem, with the 100% first-party and 30% third-party revenue. Those now belong solely to Valve, Sony and Nintendo. Throwing an Xbox sticker on a ROG Ally, doesn't change that fact.
 
That's not why they bought Activision. They bought them knowing that their goal was to eventually become the largest 3rd party publisher across all platforms.
 
Where are all the Call of Duties?! How can the Activision purchase actually help Game Pass if they don't release the Kracken?
 
HeisenbergFX4 said:
And yeah the price they paid factors in revenue as they don't expect to recoup that money in a year, its how long term investing works
Click to expand...
I think the point was more along the lines that purchasing the publisher and taking in its current revenue would be at best a neutral outcome. To me it looks like they factored in what they saw as potential and therefore paid a premium over market value. The question is whether MS can realise that potential and so far it sure doesn't look like it.

So I put this more in the basket of a bet gone bad than a long term investment where they were just parking cash for a better return than bond markets etc. But a bit of both certainly. Shades of grey and who knows how it will turn out eventually, plus MS can rate its success internally (and publicly) however they like, within mild investor scrutiny constraints.
 
Insisting the service as be all end all is a marketing tactic, all former subscribers are buying each game individually.
 
at this point I think the internal goal post went from Starfield > CoD to Releasing games day one on PlayStation. If the numbers don't add up then the shit is going to hit the fan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

New [Prototype] Game In The Works, Playtester Claims - Insider Gaming
32
1K
Paasei replied
Report: Activision to paywall game modes in Call of Duty
Rumor  2 3
122
319
MayauMiao replied
[Insider Gaming] Schedule 1 Being Investigated For IP Copyright Infringement Claims
4
526
Mownoc replied
  • Locked
Report: World of Warcraft coming to XBox and Game Pass
Rumor 
18
1K
sainraja replied
[Insider Gaming] Diablo 1 Is Coming To PC Game Pass In January, It’s Claimed (by eXtas1s)
19
1K
Ocean Dweller replied
Top Bottom