790°

Xbox Boss Phil Spencer Explains Why He Doesn't Need to Buy EA; Talks About Next-Gen Hardware

Today Microsoft's Xbox Division head Phil Spencer talked at the Barclays 2018 Global Technology, Media and Telecommunications Conference, providing more info on the company's business and plans.

Read Full Story >>
twinfinite.net
Gazondaily2394d ago

Buying out SEGA would make more sense to me considering the close association of the original Dreamcast with MS and also the DNA of the original Xbox.

The studios MS has bought up this year are quite diverse so we should get some variety next gen. Whether or not those games will be good though is an entirely different question.

OT- Giuseppe (I know how to pronounce this) at Twinfinite now? Thought you owned DS? Well, good luck at your new home.

Abriael2394d ago (Edited 2394d ago )

Nah, I was only the News Editor, so I simply moved my soapbox at Twinfinite in the same role :D It's funny how many thought that, tho :D Thanks.

darthv722393d ago

Yeah, MS doesn't need to buy EA. They need to buy smaller devs that they can nurture and help grow to be great devs.

NewMonday2393d ago

don't need EA, MS are on the right track with the developer selections recently, just need to follow through and deliver.

FallenAngel19842394d ago

“Buying out SEGA would make more sense to me considering the close association of the original Dreamcast with MS and also the DNA of the original Xbox.“

Why would that make any sense now? No Sega game sells more on Xbox than it does on other platforms. Plus the various Sega games that haven’t released on an Xbox console would just die out, especially the Japanese oriented ones.

ApocalypseShadow2394d ago (Edited 2394d ago )

Yeah. It sound crazy. Why would Sammy sell sega when they can continue to make money off of them?

And two, Japanese games are mostly shunned by the Xbox crowed while Sega's games are selling quite well on playstation with many being exclusive.

Septic is talking nonsense. Sammy didn't merge with sega to be bought by an American company.

trouble_bubble2394d ago

Sega still makes games that are Japan first. Yakuza games only get localized west years later. Xbox doesn’t have the presence in Japan to go exclusive anything there.They’d literally lose 99% of that game’s audience.

Better off buying Sleeping Dogs and bringing back True Crime.

Obscure_Observer2394d ago

@FallenAngel1984

"Why would that make any sense now? No Sega game sells more on Xbox than it does on other platforms."

Some people would say the same thing about Ninja Theory before Phil acquired them. :p

majiebeast2393d ago

@obscure

Yeah and they will get shut down when the next game bombs and i cant wait to see it happen.

giovanealex2393d ago

@majiebeast oooh, you are so sad, aren't you? LOL!

2393d ago
Imortus_san2393d ago

It makes sence because it would make a huge dent on the Playstation fans.

darthv722393d ago

"Sammy didn't merge with sega to be bought by an American company."

You do know that SEGA started out as an American company... right? It was created in Honolulu Hawaii in 1940 as Standard Games and then years later they changed to SErvice GAmes... SEGA

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2393d ago
2394d ago Replies(6)
neutralgamer19922393d ago

Septic

If sega or Capcom ever needs to be bought out than it will be Sony or Nintendo. There are Japanese laws that will prevent American company to buy sega

DarXyde2393d ago

You think Microsoft should buy SEGA?

Screw that. That would result in acquiring Atlus, and I'm not with that idea one bit.

Imortus_san2393d ago

If they could buy Capcom and, spin out huge collections of their arcade games, plus a new Mega Man Legends 3, now that would be great.

Veneno2393d ago

If anything other companies should consider buying the Xbox brand and see if they can turn it around.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2393d ago
FallenAngel19842394d ago

Microsoft can’t buy EA period. That publisher makes way too much money as a multiplatform company that Microsoft wouldn’t be able to make any bid as a buyout that’d be more lucrative than what they continue making on their own.

In fact no major publisher has any reason to sell out like that. This was already discussed at the beginning of the year when people thought Microsoft might actually buy on of the top dog third party publishers.

rainslacker2394d ago

I suppose they could, but it wouldn't be just a simple buy out. I'm also not sure that the board on MS would even be game to try and take a controlling interest in the company. That would be quite the investment, and take quite a bit of time, and as soon as takeover talks began, the shares would inflate, then go back down after it were all done, causing MS to have an instant loss on their hands....not to mention the loss in value that would come along because using it to leverage Windows or Xbox would significantly reduce the revenue that EA gets. Madden, FIFA, and Star Wars would be unaffected because EA is required to make those multi-plat through the license.

MS is much better off just buying studios. Maybe buying a studio off EA even. But a whole publisher, especially the size of EA, is just a poor business decision. MS doesn't need a publishing house, as they already have their own.

Obscure_Observer2394d ago

@rainslacker

"MS is much better off just buying studios. Maybe buying a studio off EA even. But a whole publisher, especially the size of EA, is just a poor business decision. MS doesn't need a publishing house, as they already have their own."

Yes, that´s what he said. Phil wants Game Pass to be the "Netflix' of gaming so to acquire/create more studios to create more first party content just make sense to achieve that goal.

rainslacker2393d ago

I know what Phil said. I read the article. I wasn't making a comment on what they should or shouldn't do. I was replying to the original poster talking about the business side of things, not MS reasons for buying, or not buying EA.

Bigpappy2393d ago

Sure they can. Just need to buy up most of their shares in the market.

shiva12393d ago (Edited 2393d ago )

Microsoft brought Linkedin for 26.2 billion. If Satya Nadella is given the right justification to buy out then money is not a big deal for microsoft....

So the guy who speaks to Satya is not keen in EA.... It will not happen. It was asked and Phil gave inputs of what he thought.

He has given a comment that this was thought out, which im pretty sure they had a pretty good discussion and if EA was brought, then people would have been fired due to management layers....

giovanealex2393d ago

"Microsoft can’t buy EA period." ( FallenAngel1984)

I found the guy who didn't read the article.

timlot2393d ago

Why would Microsoft buy EA to make it exclusive? Minecraft is still everywhere. You think in the NFL is going to let Madden be exclusive.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2393d ago
SpaceRanger2394d ago

“The thing I love about Fortnite is that it happened on our platform. It happened on other platforms as well, but we were able to reap the benefits of Fortnite’s success without actually investing in Fortnite as a specific form of content.”

No but they invested heavily in and launched a buggy mess with PUBG which ended up getting eaten up by the stupid crazy uptake in Fortnite.

rainslacker2394d ago

Ironically, he probably hated Fortnite for pretty much instantly taking a lot of the hype away from their PUBG exclusivity. That died out practically overnight, except among some of the console war warriors who tried in vain to justify the buggy mess, and extreme lack of content that was PUBG.

If anything, it was that hype from PUBG on consoles perpetuated by the console war, that opened the door for Epic to swoop in and get everyone on board their product instead. It was rather clever of Epic to be honest. If they had charged for that portion of the game, it probably wouldn't be raking in billions in revenue right now.

ApocalypseShadow2394d ago (Edited 2394d ago )

Hey space, you know what's also funny and we still don't see barely any outrage?

You see where he says "reap the benefits?"

Of course when they have fortnite, a F2P game behind a paywall.

They're definitely reaping the benefits. Buckets of anti consumer cash money.

gangsta_red2394d ago

Launched? You mean when PUBG was in early access on Xbox?

SpaceRanger2394d ago

Yup, when it launched in early access and even its “official” launch. It’s still a buggy mess right now.

gangsta_red2394d ago

Well, yeah it was buggy in early access. I would think that's a given.

But you're seriously over exaggerating if you're saying it's a buggy mess now.

giovanealex2393d ago

@SpaceRanger you have never played it, of course.
NEXT!

spicelicka2393d ago

That's unrelated to Fortnite. Even if they could foresee the buggyness of PUBG it's not like they could invest that money in Fortnite. Seems like an unnecessary plug you added there.

Gamist2dot02393d ago

"...but we were able to reap the benefits of Fortnite’s success without actually investing in Fortnite as a specific form of content."

Translation: We made people pay for Live to play a popular Free-to-Play game muahahahahahhahaha..."

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 2393d ago
rainslacker2394d ago

LOL. Doesn't need to buy? As if that's an easy option? How about you can't just buy EA. That would take a hostile takeover, and would take quite a bit of effort, considering EA is worth a lot of money, and while MS has more, I doubt they are going to invest that much for another publisher. MS could certainly invest in EA through buying shares, and maybe even buy up enough to have a strong controlling influence....possibly even enough to control the board to a great extent. But in doing so, there is no reason for them to change the operations of the company, because that would ultimately devalue the brand if they leveraged it for PC and XBox. There is no point investing just to devalue the acquisition.

ApocalypseShadow2394d ago (Edited 2394d ago )

What he doesn't say is that they couldn't afford the price of EA and what EA's investors would want from lost revenue and future revenue on other platforms that make them money.

What he also doesn't talk about is the loss in EA's multiplatform licenses that would be revoked. Giving other 3rd parties opportunity to create and license star wars, nfl,fifa, etc. And outdo them like nba 2K does to live.

And the amount of developers they would have to manage. They can barely manage a few without closing them. Also, a lot of positions would be redundant resulting in many job losses.

Best bet is to continue to enjoy EA's support they already get and look for opportunities for exclusive content.

2394d ago Replies(1)
Show all comments (116)
200°

Sony is all-in on PlayStation Plus, says its most expensive tier is thriving

Sony kicks off PS Plus' 15th anniversary by chatting with Game File about the past, present and future of its gaming subscription service: Talking price, catalogue tweaks and where the PS3 games are.

Read Full Story >>
gamefile.news
CrimsonWing6911h ago

Glad, I’m about to downgrade when they raise the price. For me, I don’t really access much or care about the games they have in the library and if I do, it’d be cheaper to just buy them over time rather than stick to some expensive subscription model.

crazyCoconuts10h ago

When you're new to the service you've got an avalanche of games to play. After you catch up, I agree, it's not worth it beyond the Essential tier for me.
That being said, the Essential tier is the best deal in console gaming imo, based on the monthly games you get to keep.

Profchaos4h ago

Yeah same will be downgrading $214 aud is insane and we don't even get the streaming capabilities in Australia which they said would make the top level subscription cheaper.

If i was to just buy the games I actually play that come to the service id be far better off.

Ill keep the essential tier to retain the games ive collected since the ps3 and for mp but I'm not convinced of the premium tiers value any more

victorMaje1h ago

Went back to essential a few months ago. I’m buying more physical and it has helped in finishing more games.

Alos8811h ago

Extra is probably the best value for money right now, Premium doesn't have anything special enough to justify paying the additional imo.

OtterX10h ago

*unless you have a Portal & you catch Premium on discount during Days of Play or Black Friday.

Yea, I really do wish they'd up their effort on Premium titles, but allowing a large catalog of titles that can stream to your Portal without even having to use your PS5 is pretty awesome. We travel about 2 hours to stay with my inlaws from time to time, so it's been pretty killer to only need to take my Portal for that!

andy859h ago

Yup if you have a portal premium is the best tier for sure

jznrpg10h ago

Add some more classics with trophies. Vagrant Story first

OtterX10h ago

Nice choice. I agree!

Jeanne D'Arc was my favorite PS+ catalog title from last year & I Platinumed it!

Eonjay8h ago

I like Ridge Racer, Tekken and Grandia. Add Xenogears, digimon World 3, Classic GTA and ill be happy

jznrpg6h ago

Jeanne D’Arc was great!

@Eonjay there is a Grandia collection available for PS4, I’m not sure if it’s been on plus already or not

darthv7210h ago

cloud streaming to the portal, without using the ps5, is the selling point of premium to me.

Obscure_Observer10h ago

If the consumers are happy, Sony is even happier.

It is what it is.

Show all comments (28)
60°

Hitoshi Sakimoto Celebrates 40 Years Of Game Composing With A Streaming Collection

The legendary composer celebrates forty years of game composing with a new collection.

220°

Yoshida claims PS believes Xbox is their only competitor, truth is they don’t have one any more

Former PlayStation boss Shuhei Yoshida claims PlayStation still believes Xbox is their only true competitor, not Nintendo.

Read Full Story >>
videogamer.com
8d ago
Terry_B6d ago

True, they have pretty different audiences..and some People just have both at home or a PS and a PC that emulates more or less everything from Nintendo.

Knightofelemia6d ago

Xbox hasn't been a competitor since the XB360. Last generation and this generation Sony has been running circles around Xbox. As for Sony vs Nintendo Sony runs circles yes but I don't really see Nintendo as competition. Nintendo does their own thing and it works.

6d ago Replies(1)
Lightning776d ago

Details are important. Console sales yes. Overall games Xbox seems to be doing fairly well in that department.

LoveSpuds5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

MS were doing so well that they had to start selling their games on their main competitors system which in turn results in around 30% of each sale going to Sony as the platform holder.

I do think tjat MS' fortunes will improve now that they are actually selling games rather than giving them away for pennies on the dollar.

Something that occurs to me is that the more success MS published games have elsewhere, the more stark it will become that selling games is much more profitable than renting them. If that becomes highly noticable, I wonder what the shareholders (who ultimately run the show) will make of a service which has stagnated for years?

crazyCoconuts5d ago

PlayStation doesn't compete with third party games, they compete on consoles. They profit from third party games. If you're not comparing consoles there's no point in comparing.

drivxr6d ago

Console wars are over.

Eventually, everyone else will catch up to this fact.

attilayavuzer6d ago (Edited 6d ago )

I think it's all PS fans have left at this point. Console wars were always a competition for fourth place behind Nintendo, PC and mobile. If Xbox evaporates into a hybrid virtual platform, then PS will be perennially left in last place.

Christopher6d ago

Strange, I recall all those FCC documents and witness testimonies saying the exact opposite... Guess Microsoft doesn't know what it's talking about?

PanicMechanic5d ago (Edited 5d ago )

Great analysis. Just joking.

Pretending like companies give a f about where they “rank” against each other is just super retarded. This isn’t the World Cup.

Tell me, how does “PC” compete against a brand like PlayStation? It just doesn’t make sense at all. What you just said, is complete and utter nonsense

BlaqMagiq15d ago

I don't think PS cares about being in this so-called "last place" you came up with when they're making profits hand over fist.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 5d ago
Destiny10806d ago

microsoft wanted to crush sony into dust and they had the money to do it, but with such weak leadership it was always going to fail

Reaper22_6d ago

Had the money? They still have the money but the industry has changed since xbox 360. Microsoft is the number one publisher in gaming. I'd hardly call that failing.

IRetrouk6d ago (Edited 6d ago )

The industry hasn't changed though, just ms, Microsoft was the no1 publisher for a month in december 2024, the actual no1 for fy2024 was tencent if game sales are all that's being counted.

Profchaos6d ago

Money doesn't mean you'll be successful large corporations have entered and failed before like Nec

Show all comments (23)