[RUMOR] Microsoft To Buy Electronic Arts? [Archive]

Telefrog

09-23-2009, 01:05 PM

We've seen this rumor before, but it's really picking up steam now.

"There's talk that Microsoft might be interested in acquiring Electronic Arts. It's unsubstantiated chatter, but it's out there," said Frederic Ruffy, options strategist at WhatsTrading.com in New York.

A London-based trader also cited similar talk as making rounds in Europe. Microsoft shares were up 0.9 percent at $26 on Nasdaq.
Not much more right now, other than rumors and speculation.

Source: Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idCNN2339589020090923?rpc=44)

Gorvi

09-23-2009, 01:06 PM

That would be like buying the US console market.

And it would guarantee I'd buy 360 games, I need to play the next Dead Space. :p

Because someone has to say it, Capcom is next! ;)

EDIT: Overall, though, this would more likely than not be quite bad for the industry.

Wraith

09-23-2009, 01:07 PM

I think we know what a deal like this would mean (http://www.colonyofgamers.com/cogforums/showthread.php?t=12284).

Virtual Pariah

09-23-2009, 01:08 PM

I thought it was MS buying Capcom?

It would make sense for MS to buy EA.
It would lock in the sports franchises and give them an opportunity to move the Zune HD into a more viable position re: APP store.

Therefore it'll never happen...

AgtFox

09-23-2009, 01:12 PM

Probably be smart for MS to go after them before Disney tries to acquire them.

THQ rumors are swirling again as well. EA could buy them and then overtake the UFC license...heh ;)

violent

09-23-2009, 01:14 PM

If Microsoft buys EA they will own the majority of the sports market. Well on the way to the one console future*.

*Wii don't count.

Grifter

09-23-2009, 01:14 PM

If this were to happen it would turn the console games industry on its ear and most definitely put us one step closer to a one console world.

Telefrog

09-23-2009, 01:18 PM

The sad part would be everyone at EA that develops for the PC getting the axe...

MalReynolds

09-23-2009, 01:19 PM

MS own like the biggest game producing company ... Jesus the world would end!

AgtFox

09-23-2009, 01:19 PM

The sad part would be everyone at EA that develops for the PC getting the axe...
I wouldn't say that...if anything EA would strengthen Microsoft's Games for Windows section with stuff like C&C.

DoctorFinger

09-23-2009, 01:26 PM

Wow. MS owning EA. I can't quite wrap my head around that. Would that be the biggest single piece of gaming news of the last 20 years?

rein

09-23-2009, 01:27 PM

Capcom? EA? Who is next in line for the MS rumor mill? Activision?

Telefrog

09-23-2009, 01:28 PM

I wouldn't say that...if anything EA would strengthen Microsoft's Games for Windows section with stuff like C&C.

I don't know about that. You couldv'e said the same thing about Ensemble. Look what happened to them.

The C&C franchise has been pretty quickly migrating over to the console side of things. Check out Red Alert Commander's Challenge.

Hemalin

09-23-2009, 01:28 PM

I wouldn't say that...if anything EA would strengthen Microsoft's Games for Windows section with stuff like C&C.
I'm sure Ensemble thought the same thing.

DoctorFinger

09-23-2009, 01:28 PM

Activision would not cost that much more right now than EA would, and most of the same suitors would be after them.

AgtFox

09-23-2009, 01:31 PM

Wow. MS owning EA. I can't quite wrap my head around that. Would that be the biggest single piece of gaming news of the last 20 years?
Possibly ever. A console maker buying the second biggest 3rd party publisher (used to be first) is huge news. Easily trumps Disney buying Marvel. Microsoft certainly has plenty of cash laying around to buy EA (market cap of ~$6.5 billion versus Micrsoft's almost $232 billion).

Grifter

09-23-2009, 01:33 PM

Activision would not cost that much more right now than EA would, and most of the same suitors would be after them.

But MS buying Activision, while still a pretty big event, would have no where near the impact on the industry as MS buying EA.

Strangely enough I have absolutely no problem with this, maybe curiosity has gotten the better of me but I kind of hope MS does buy EA just because I'd like to see what would happen.

AgtFox

09-23-2009, 01:33 PM

I'm sure Ensemble thought the same thing.
You guys forget Ensemble morphed into 3 other companies, one of which is wholly owned by Microsoft (I forget which one). Microsoft certainly isn't going to drop the Sims series which is primarily a PC endeavor.

Hemalin

09-23-2009, 01:34 PM

AgtFox

09-23-2009, 01:35 PM

But MS buying Activision, while still a pretty big event, would have no where near the impact on the industry as MS buying EA.

Strangely enough I have absolutely no problem with this, maybe curiosity has gotten the better of me but I kind of hope MS does buy EA just because I'd like to see what would happen.
How could MS buying Activision not have the bigger impact? Activision is the #1 3rd party publisher now, they took it away from EA last year. For size point, the Activision takeover would be a bigger hit since their market cap is almost $16 billion. That's mostly because of the merger. Pre-merger Activision itself was probably about the same market cap as EA.

Wolvie

09-23-2009, 01:36 PM

DoctorFinger

09-23-2009, 01:37 PM

But MS buying Activision, while still a pretty big event, would have no where near the impact on the industry as MS buying EA. Wouldn't it? Remember Activision is bigger than EA now. Yeah, potentially turning Rock Band and all of the major sports titles into Xbox exclusives would be mind-boggling, but so would taking CoD, Guitar Hero and the rest of the Acti-Blizz slate to the Xbox as well.

Dukefrukem

09-23-2009, 01:37 PM

I think we know what a deal like this would mean (http://www.colonyofgamers.com/cogforums/showthread.php?t=12284).

bwhahahahaha.

This would suck btw.

AgtFox

09-23-2009, 01:37 PM

The way Microsoft has been going the last few years, it doesn't seem like they are too interested in doing much in-house stuff anymore. They'd more likely just get exclusive publishing rights than actually buy everything.
343 Industries (the new Halo division of Microsoft) is amassing a number of industry people, don't be too surprised to see in-house stuff making a comeback from Microsoft. Bungie, even though they became independent, is going to be under Microsoft's arm to the end of days in my opinion.

Gorvi

09-23-2009, 01:38 PM

One word my friends, Madden. If MS bought EA, it would own the American sports market. Having the 360 be the only place in town that has the only game(NFL) in town? Yeah, game over for the US market.

I doubt Sony or Nintendo would let this happen.
That's the concern. If you want a one console future for the US hardcore, you'd see it with this. I don't think anyone in their right mind would want that.

AgtFox

09-23-2009, 01:39 PM

One word my friends, Madden. If MS bought EA, it would own the American sports market. Having the 360 be the only place in town that has the only game(NFL) in town? Yeah, game over for the US market.

I doubt Sony or Nintendo would let this happen.
The beauty here is that neither Sony nor Nintendo can really stop it. They don't have the money coffers Microsoft has to make such a move.

Sony market cap: $28.5 billion
Nintendo market cap: $37 billion

Gorvi

09-23-2009, 01:39 PM

The beauty here is that neither Sony nor Nintendo can really stop it. They don't have the money coffers Microsoft has to make such a move.
You call that beautiful? I call it sickening.

roboninja

09-23-2009, 01:39 PM

If this were to happen, I might very well not ever buy a console again. That is, assuming MS would make the changes I imagine they would; all EA games exclusive to the MS console.

DoctorFinger

09-23-2009, 01:41 PM

For the record, I think MS (or Sony, or Nintnedo) buying developers is fine, but them controlling EA would be bad for the industry overall.

Psykoboy2

09-23-2009, 01:41 PM

Wow. MS owning EA. I can't quite wrap my head around that. Would that be the biggest single piece of gaming news of the last 20 years?

Maybe we should make an award for it or something. ;)

Grifter

09-23-2009, 01:43 PM

How could MS buying Activision not have the bigger impact? Activision is the #1 3rd party publisher now, they took it away from EA last year. For size point, the Activision takeover would be a bigger hit since their market cap is almost $16 billion. That's mostly because of the merger. Pre-merger Activision itself was probably about the same market cap as EA.

Wouldn't it? Remember Activision is bigger than EA now. Yeah, potentially turning Rock Band and all of the major sports titles into Xbox exclusives would be mind-boggling, but so would taking CoD, Guitar Hero and the rest of the Acti-Blizz slate to the Xbox as well.

Activision may be bigger but EA has far more pull in this industry, like wolvie said EA sports alone can make or break a console, we've seen it happen before.

Also, Moore was obviously just a plant and this was part of MS strategy all along...

AgtFox

09-23-2009, 01:43 PM

You call that beautiful? I call it sickening.
No, I'm just saying neither Sony nor Nintendo can do anything about it. They simply don't have the money or stock options to acquire EA.

Tech and Media companies are getting very acquire happy. Dell just bought Perot to compete with HP for example.

AgtFox

09-23-2009, 01:45 PM

If this were to happen, I might very well not ever buy a console again. That is, assuming MS would make the changes I imagine they would; all EA games exclusive to the MS console.
I don't see any way EA games wouldn't be exclusive to MS. MS may offer multi-platform releases, but I find it hard to see Sony or Nintendo paying a royalty to MS in order to release EA games.

RandoM51

09-23-2009, 01:52 PM

I don't see this as happening. Microsoft doesn't want to herd any more developers than they have to, one of the reasons they've been getting rid of them the past 2-3 years.

The only way I'd see this happening is if MS bought EA, then axed all of the developers. They'd have the EA IP and then they'd contract external developers to make the games. They don't want those developers in-house because of the encumbrance a company like Microsoft deals with for each employee.

Just doesn't make much sense to me either way, not to mention what the justice department might have to say about it.

Expugnare

09-23-2009, 01:55 PM

If this did happen, I would expect Microsoft to make pretty much everything EA releases a 3-6 month timed exclusive. That way they could get the big rush of sales from the multiconsole owners and have a trickle come in with the other releases, while still rubbing it in Sony and Nintendo's faces that they have to pay their rival for games.

In reality, I don't know if the higher ups at Microsoft would want to make so big of an investment in gaming.

Xerxes

09-23-2009, 02:01 PM

And to retaliate, Sony buys Square Enix.

Dukefrukem

09-23-2009, 02:03 PM

And to retaliate, Sony buys Square Enix.

Ha. That'd be epic.

Karak

09-23-2009, 02:04 PM

Neogaf damn near shut down this morning when this was posted.
Stranger things have happened...well maybe not.
It would indeed be one of the largest structure changes I can ever remember.

violent

09-23-2009, 02:09 PM

Neogaf damn near shut down this morning when this was posted.
Stranger things have happened...well maybe not.
It would indeed be one of the largest structure changes I can ever remember.

I once went to an ice cream shop and ordered a cone of mint chocolate chip. Easily my favorite ice cream flavor. When I was paying, the woman behind me in line had the most atrocious perfume you ever smelled. It was like like a potato stuffed with burnt hair. So I'm trying to pay for my cone before the smell gets stuck in my nose and my cone taste like shit. I pay and rush out and the funny thing was that when I got that first big inhale of fresh air, it was like a rush of water and I let out a massive sneeze. When I sneezed, Neogaf went down.

Adam Blue

09-23-2009, 02:23 PM

This means the Apple gaming machine is almost here, and Microsoft wants to take away anything that could give Apple steam. Activision will also be getting into hardware as well, and since EA has been eyeing the idea, this will bring it all together.

It makes sense.

I know this sounds like sarcasm, but this talk is seriously going on.

crazyD

09-23-2009, 02:31 PM

Adam Blue

09-23-2009, 02:35 PM

This would be the worst thing to happen to gaming that I could fucking imagine. The Xbox would stand to gain a ridiculous marketshare, and they have been extremely unfriendly to gamers all gen. More pull would be terrible.

How have some of MS choices been any different than the other two, and do you neglect some of the revolutionary ideas MS has pushed through which has changed this generation of gaming?

Apple/Activision is what we have to worry about.

JayVe

09-23-2009, 02:36 PM

Last I heard, Microsoft was poised to purchase Capcom.

Yeti2005

09-23-2009, 02:38 PM

crazyD

09-23-2009, 02:38 PM

How have some of MS choices been any different than the other two, and do you neglect some of the revolutionary ideas MS has pushed through which has changed this generation of gaming?

Apple/Activision is what we have to worry about.

Charging for online pay, starting the microtransaction revolution, size caps for downloadable games, extremely overpriced proprietary peripherals, poor quality control... the list goes on. I am extremely worried about MS having any more control over the industry then it already does.

rein

09-23-2009, 02:43 PM

How have some of MS choices been any different than the other two, and do you neglect some of the revolutionary ideas MS has pushed through which has changed this generation of gaming?

Apple/Activision is what we have to worry about.
The question back to you? Why do we have to worry about Apple/Activision any more than MS/EA?

IMO, it's going to be really bad when any console/game system manufacturer starts buying up the current large third party publishers regardless of which one it is. I know some people would like to see a single console market but not me. I like the balance of fair competition. Whne gaming gets into a monopoly market we're all fucked. But, if I can answer your question, Live Gold. I don't want to have to pay extra to access the multiplayer part of gaming.

DoctorFinger

09-23-2009, 02:44 PM

I'm not sure why everyone thinks if MS bought EA that they'd no longer support PS3, Wii, DS, etc. It's not like MS is going to say "hey we don't like to make money so let's cut out some big revenue generating areas".

That's not to say the 360 wouldn't get preferencial treatment but they wouldn't dare drop support for the other consoles, hand helds.Because it's almost unheard of for a console maker to put out games on the systems of their direct competitors. Yes, they'd make money on them, they'd make more by keeping them all to themselves.

If this goes through MS would make damn sure that all of EA's output from then on is Xbox only.

Adam Blue

09-23-2009, 02:46 PM

Charging for online pay, starting the microtransaction revolution, size caps for downloadable games, extremely overpriced proprietary peripherals, poor quality control... the list goes on. I am extremely worried about MS having any more control over the industry then it already does.

IMO, the pros outweigh the cons. We have badass console online play, DLC that is sometimes worth it, XBLA pushing console DD, and better warranty support than Sony. The ideas may come at a cost, but it's up to the others to expand on it and make them better. Better to have the ideas than not at all, right? Also, MS allowed Rare games to be published on GBA/DS/GCN. And willing to have Goldeneye also published on the Wii, even for a cost. They are good to the gamer.

Acquiring EA doesn't mean industry control. Remember: Apple/Activision. Something is brewing, not sure when all the announcements will be made though.

Yeti2005

09-23-2009, 02:47 PM

Because it's almost unheard of for a console maker to put out games on the systems of their direct competitors. Yes, they'd make money on them, they'd make more by keeping them all to themselves.

If this goes through MS would make damn sure that all of EA's output from then on is Xbox only.

Really, you think MS would make more money if they devoted EA's resources to only making games for the 360 and ignoring the millions of Wii, DS, PSP and PS3 owners? Seriously?

Adam Blue

09-23-2009, 02:47 PM

The question back to you? Why do we have to worry about Apple/Activision any more than MS/EA?

IMO, it's going to be really bad when any console/game system manufacturer starts buying up the current large third party publishers regardless of which one it is. I know some people would like to see a single console market but not me. I like the balance of fair competition. Whne gaming gets into a monopoly market we're all fucked. But, if I can answer your question, Live Gold. I don't want to have to pay extra to access the multiplayer part of gaming.

Like I mentioned, both Apple and Activision want to get into hardware. Both are huge with already established marketshare. Think: Guitar Hero, WoW, iPhone.

AgtFox

09-23-2009, 02:56 PM

Acquiring EA doesn't mean industry control. Remember: Apple/Activision. Something is brewing, not sure when all the announcements will be made though.
You have any links to the rumblings? Just asking because this is the first time I've heard of any Apple/Activision thing. Are you saying Apple is possibly buying Activision? There's been rumblings of Disney buying EA for a year now and the MS rumor has come up before, just not as strongly as now.

I'm not sure that's good for Activision, possibly eliminating all console support and going with whatever Apple's new gaming endeavor may be. MS/EA I can see because they are both established gaming companies, but Apple, where little to no gaming is on their main platform (actual Macs and not iPhone/iPod Touch), buying Activision is a questionable tactic. Not saying it wouldn't work, but it would be very interesting to watch.

Also, I will say I think Harmonix and Rock Band is more in line with Apple's thought process and than Guitar Hero.

DoctorFinger

09-23-2009, 02:57 PM

Really, you think MS would make more money if they devoted EA's resources to only making games for the 360 and ignoring the millions of Wii, DS, PSP and PS3 owners? Seriously?
They why aren't they putting Halo out on the PS3? Why can't I play Uncharted on my 360? Because exclusives sell systems, and systems move games. A 1st party game is always more valuable to a console maker than even the best 3rd party exclusive.

Esquilax1138

09-23-2009, 02:57 PM

Really, you think MS would make more money if they devoted EA's resources to only making games for the 360 and ignoring the millions of Wii, DS, PSP and PS3 owners? Seriously?

They might not make more money right away, but I can see them doing it to try and drive Sony and Nintendo from the home console market entirely. They have the money to burn to do it, and MS's Xbox plans were never about getting just profits, they want market share, and all of it they can take.

And seeing how MS has treated their PC gamers, I say the very thought of this happening sucks ass.

DoctorFinger

09-23-2009, 02:58 PM

Like I mentioned, both Apple and Activision want to get into hardware. Both are huge with already established marketshare. Think: Guitar Hero, WoW, iPhone.I Just don't see Apple making a dedicated gaming system. Between the iPhone and the mythic iTablet they'd have a pair of good platforms to sell games, so why make a gaming-only or gaming-mostly device to compete?

TheEpicOfTyler

09-23-2009, 02:59 PM

I can't imagine NFL or FIFA would be happy about that.

rein

09-23-2009, 02:59 PM

IMO, the pros outweigh the cons. We have badass console online play, DLC that is sometimes worth it, XBLA pushing console DD, and better warranty support than Sony. The ideas may come at a cost, but it's up to the others to expand on it and make them better. Better to have the ideas than not at all, right? Also, MS allowed Rare games to be published on GBA/DS/GCN. And willing to have Goldeneye also published on the Wii, even for a cost. They are good to the gamer.

Acquiring EA doesn't mean industry control. Remember: Apple/Activision. Something is brewing, not sure when all the announcements will be made though.

I like online play on the PC just fine. Even more than I do on LIVE. DD is coming regardless of who is in control. It is Sony releasing the first DD only game system. MS was forced into the better warranty support. Your arguments for MS are not making me feel better. Better ideas at a cost? Really? Besides, Sony and Nintendo have not been sitting on their asses. Look how many consoles are adding "motion" controllers now.

Like I mentioned, both Apple and Activision want to get into hardware. Both are huge with already established marketshare. Think: Guitar Hero, WoW, iPhone. But why do I need to fear that any more than MS/EA? It all scares me since I like to see a balanced competition in the market. I don't want to see the market tip too far in favor of any single company.

Karak

09-23-2009, 03:01 PM

Really, you think MS would make more money if they devoted EA's resources to only making games for the 360 and ignoring the millions of Wii, DS, PSP and PS3 owners? Seriously?

The real question...would you want them?
Would MS make sure that by the time they came to those systems, or the fashion in which they came would they be worth it?
1-2 year exclusive, already poor console ports to PS3 being worse. Wii games with even less resources put forth.

Its the same boat as if Sony bought them.
However, I would love to just have 2 systems. But I don't see that happening.

AgtFox

09-23-2009, 03:02 PM

Really, you think MS would make more money if they devoted EA's resources to only making games for the 360 and ignoring the millions of Wii, DS, PSP and PS3 owners? Seriously?
Well, the thought process would be if there are people out there that don't own 360s and enjoy EA's games, they're more apt to buy a 360 in order to play EA's lineup. Whether that thinking is right is up to interpretation and maybe Microsoft is willing to throw the dice on that option.

You have to look at the other side of the situation as well. Microsoft may well allow them to release stuff across all platforms, but is Sony or Nintendo willing to pay the royalty to Microsoft in order for those games to come out on the systems? At this moment, games that release across platform are often led by the 360 in sales, often at close to a 2:1 ratio over the PS3 version. There have been some oddities (such as I believe World Tour sold better on Wii than the other systems), but for the most part the 360 leads the sales here. Call of Duty I believe is a 3:1 or higher ratio, at least with the last Infinity Ward release (CoD4: Modern Warfare).

crazyD

09-23-2009, 03:03 PM

IMO, the pros outweigh the cons. We have badass console online play, DLC that is sometimes worth it, XBLA pushing console DD, and better warranty support than Sony. The ideas may come at a cost, but it's up to the others to expand on it and make them better. Better to have the ideas than not at all, right? Also, MS allowed Rare games to be published on GBA/DS/GCN. And willing to have Goldeneye also published on the Wii, even for a cost. They are good to the gamer.

Acquiring EA doesn't mean industry control. Remember: Apple/Activision. Something is brewing, not sure when all the announcements will be made though.

I think MS's digital game releases have been some of the worst overall. Sony has them beat by far on that. And I am not a fan of Live online, in that I cannot see any reason to justify the cost. And the warranty is only better because their systems are MUCH more likely to break. I think they are extremely gamer unfriendly, and would be terrible as the only platform.

Really, you think MS would make more money if they devoted EA's resources to only making games for the 360 and ignoring the millions of Wii, DS, PSP and PS3 owners? Seriously?

Do you see a PS3 version of Halo out? Despite the fact that it would rake in cash?

Yeti2005

09-23-2009, 03:07 PM

Do you see a PS3 version of Halo out? Despite the fact that it would rake in cash?

The big difference is Bungie makes 360 games, EA already makes PS3 games. You're talking about utter insanity to have MS make a huge potential purchase (easily a billion plus) and then destroy any short term ROI by cutting off the other consoles. It's even crazier idea in this economy.

TheFlyingOrc

09-23-2009, 03:10 PM

You're assuming the MS board of directors are crazy and are willing to spend over a possibly a billion plus on EA and negate any type of ROI in the short term in a bad economy to potentially take over the entire console market. Sounds like a sane plan to me.

Considering the entire reason that Microsoft got into this business was to keep Sony from every intruding on their territory, I could see it happening. Acquiring Madden would be close to a death knell for Sony, and I don't think there was anything that could do that at this point.

Also, Peter Moore could get his old job back!

Doctor Setebos

09-23-2009, 03:10 PM

The beauty here is that neither Sony nor Nintendo can really stop it. They don't have the money coffers Microsoft has to make such a move.

Sony market cap: $28.5 billion
Nintendo market cap: $37 billionThat's not necessarily true. You're going by Nintendo's market capitalization numbers on the OTC (http://www.google.com/finance?q=OTC:NTDOY), which is purely international trading. To get their TRUE market capitalization, you would have to know their numbers on the Tokyo exchange (http://www.google.com/finance?q=TYO:7974), which they don't share.

AgtFox

09-23-2009, 03:12 PM

That's not necessarily true. You're going by Nintendo's market capitalization numbers on the OTC (http://www.google.com/finance?q=OTC:NTDOY), which is purely international trading. To get their TRUE market capitalization, you would have to know their numbers on the Tokyo exchange (http://www.google.com/finance?q=TYO:7974), which they don't share.
Although I think we can safely say that Microsoft is several times larger in shares amount than Nintendo is. Plus out of the major three, Nintendo is the least likely to attempt to takeover a company like EA honestly. Correct?

crazyD

09-23-2009, 03:15 PM

The big difference is Bungie makes 360 games, EA already makes PS3 games. You're talking about utter insanity to have MS make a huge potential purchase (easily a billion plus) and then destroy any short term ROI by cutting off the other consoles. It's even crazier idea in this economy.

Bungie makes 360 games because they worked for MS. It's not that they are incapable of making a PS3 game, or wouldn't as a free agent.

TheFlyingOrc

09-23-2009, 03:21 PM

A few things:

Nintendo would be WAAAAAY less impacted by this than Sony.

Activision is the bigger company, but it got there on the back of Guitar Hero - a franchise whose sales seem to be waning somewhat, unlike Madden. A HUGE percentage of the value of Activision is tied up in Blizzard, and Microsoft has almost nothing to gain by owning Warcraft. EA would just be the better value for a console maker to own - they own a very broad range of properties.

Yeti2005

09-23-2009, 03:24 PM

Bungie makes 360 games because they worked for MS. It's not that they are incapable of making a PS3 game, or wouldn't as a free agent.

You're talking about the difference between a company ramping up development on a different platform vs. telling an existing company to cease a part of it's profitable business. Those two ideas are vastly different.

Edit: I guess my point is MS will not "rock the boat" at least in the short term if they bought EA. We wouldn't see a sudden stop of development for the consoles or anything drastic like that.

Norse

09-23-2009, 03:25 PM

I prefer seeing market share pretty evenly between the three console makers. In the long run Microsoft needs more exclusive franchises to compete with Sony and Nintendo. To do this they should buy interesting developers like Sony has done, not big publishers. That would be the better route IMHO.

Arguing which companies are most "evil" is pretty silly IMHO. Any company will fuck over the customers if they have the chance to do so. People who think otherwise should have their head examined. I don't want more competition in the console business from companies like Apple. The market is crowded enough as it is.

Urizen

09-23-2009, 03:27 PM

Doctor Setebos

09-23-2009, 03:27 PM

Although I think we can safely say that Microsoft is several times larger in shares amount than Nintendo is. Plus out of the major three, Nintendo is the least likely to attempt to takeover a company like EA honestly. Correct?Oh, absolutely. I agree with you there. I just think Nintendo likely has a market capitalization closer to the $50-80B range when their full global assets are taken into consideration.

EDIT: post 1900! Hooray?

TheFlyingOrc

09-23-2009, 03:29 PM

Oh, absolutely. I agree with you there. I just think Nintendo likely has a market capitalization closer to the $50-80B range when their full global assets are taken into consideration.

EDIT: post 1900! Hooray?

The only Japanese company bigger than Nintendo is supposed to be Toyota.

edit: That's apparently not true at all, and I don't know where I got my false information.

DoctorFinger

09-23-2009, 03:29 PM

Everyone here keeps saying the rumor is 'picking up steam'. Who says so? We've seen it before. Why is it different this time? MS tries to buy everyone at one point or another.

They put an offer to Nintendo in towards the end of the GC life cycle.
This time it was strong enough to goose the markets too. EA was up near 6% and MS was up nearly 2% on the rumor. It's not just a forum rumor this time.

TheFlyingOrc

09-23-2009, 03:33 PM

They put an offer to Nintendo in towards the end of the GC life cycle.
What? Microsoft tried to buy Nintendo BEFORE the Gamecube launched. Nintendo's rejection is why the Xbox exists.

Karak

09-23-2009, 03:39 PM

The big difference is Bungie makes 360 games, EA already makes PS3 games. You're talking about utter insanity to have MS make a huge potential purchase (easily a billion plus) and then destroy any short term ROI by cutting off the other consoles. It's even crazier idea in this economy.

I could see them phase out development after maybe a year. Or switch just beginning projects to PC and 360 only while letting current developing games continues. And no matter how much we bitch, if it happened. Most of us would deal with it.

TheFlyingOrc

09-23-2009, 03:41 PM

I could see them phase out development after maybe a year. Or switch just beginning projects to PC and 360 only while letting current developing games continues. And no matter how much we bitch, if it happened. Most of us would deal with it.

I'd say time delay on their competitors would be almost a certainty, though. No reason not to flex their new muscle.

Adam Blue

09-23-2009, 03:44 PM

When I typed 'Apple/Activision', I did not mean them together. Activision and EA have stated they are interested in the hardware market, and Apple is keen on game sales on the app store, with rumors circulating that the mythical tablet might be marketed in such a way. So don't think of it as a gaming only system, but it will be marketed that way through the right avenues. iPod Touch has already been doing that.

As for liking PSN over XBLA, good for you, but XBLA is fucking popular, and do a poll if you want but XBLA does have a larger library of varying titles...the titles themselves are subjective, but Shadow Complex for one sold a fuck-ton: And it is fucking awesome.

And about Halo on PS3: Both MS and Bungie have said that they could make games on other platforms. MS just has first dibs, but that's more of an open relationship than we've seen before. Rare is in the same boat obviously, so it's not far fetched.

rein, you only further my point. First DD system? iPhone/iPod touch. MS pushed DD, Apple revolutionized it, and Sony is running with their already established market. You may like PC online gaming just fine, and so do I. But CONSOLE online play is now different than it was generations ago and it only pushes the other console makers further...so I don't get your point.

Philonious

09-23-2009, 03:46 PM

menage

09-23-2009, 03:50 PM

There is enough whining and bitching already, the internets would explode with much more whining and bitching.

I would be happy if it stays like this. :D

crazyD

09-23-2009, 03:52 PM

Hemalin

09-23-2009, 03:53 PM

Karak

09-23-2009, 03:55 PM

I'm not too familiar with business, but wouldn't being owned by Microsoft decrease EA's profits because they would lose out on sales from the various other consoles? It might make sense for MS to do it, because in the long run it would help the 360 dominate the US console market, but for EA shareholders it might be a harder sell. They don't really stand to gain by cutting their market in half. Unless someone just sells off their controlling interest and sails off into the sunset, in which case they will piss off a lot of people.
Stock rose today on this news:)
But that is beside the point. You ask some good questions. It would be up to the company to decide what to do. MS takes some serious heat, but they want to win, and taking a pretty serious loss with the promise of a larger stable of games just for their system and no other. And attempt a reboot with Natal. I could see at least a couple of them thinking hard about it.
Hell the good old days of Sony paying companies to not release games on other systems(even though the game was done and pressed), isn't too long ago. This kind of thing does indeed happen.
Though this is on a massive scale.

Jason

09-23-2009, 04:08 PM

You're talking about the difference between a company ramping up development on a different platform vs. telling an existing company to cease a part of it's profitable business. Those two ideas are vastly different.

Edit: I guess my point is MS will not "rock the boat" at least in the short term if they bought EA. We wouldn't see a sudden stop of development for the consoles or anything drastic like that.

I could see MS leaving things alone this gen, but all EA games would be exclusive next gen. Then depending on sales, the NFL might would rethink the exclusive deal with EA once the current deal ends. I can also see MS cancelling all development once they bought EA just to go ahead and put that exclusive stamp on it and start putting the hurt on Sony.

Like as been said, I think Nintendo would be just find as long as they keep their current business plans as they are. And unless MS goes into the handheld market, I think they would let EA continue to support the DS and whatever else Nintendo releases in that market.

Kelegacy

09-23-2009, 04:53 PM

This would fucking suck.

Widgetcraft

09-23-2009, 05:23 PM

Just one step closer to a much-needed industry implosion.

Purple Santa

09-23-2009, 05:23 PM

This would fucking suck.

Not if you owned stock in MS and/or EA ;)

MalReynolds

09-23-2009, 05:25 PM

agree'd But id rather this not happen

rein

09-23-2009, 05:34 PM

rein, you only further my point. First DD system? iPhone/iPod touch. MS pushed DD, Apple revolutionized it, and Sony is running with their already established market. You may like PC online gaming just fine, and so do I. But CONSOLE online play is now different than it was generations ago and it only pushes the other console makers further...so I don't get your point.First DD video game system. I'm not following you when you say MS pushed DD content. Apple and the PC market pushed DD content. All three console makers offer it on consoles and I don't see where MS is pushing it any harder than Sony. Sony has already released one game that was sold DD only and they are the first to bring a video game system to the market that will be 100% DD. That looks to me like Sony is pushing it further than any of the three console makers at this point. If you want to argue Microsoft pushed online community gaming and a sleek online interface on consoles to the market I can agree but I don't see it where direct download content is concerned. Do you think Sony would not have the PSN if MS had not gotten into the video game market? Of course they would.

But CONSOLE online play is now different than it was generations ago and it only pushes the other console makers further.. The internet is much different than it was generations ago and there is much more broadband penetration so that isn't a fair statement. But this is exctly why I want to see the market stay balanced. You act as if MS is the only company to bring something to the console market. They all three push each other. It's not as one-sided as you're making it out to be. I've already given you an example where Nintendo pushed motion control and Sony is pushing the first DD only video game system.

Adam Blue

09-23-2009, 05:58 PM

First DD video game system. I'm not following you when you say MS pushed DD content. Apple and the PC market pushed DD content. All three console makers offer it on consoles and I don't see where MS is pushing it any harder than Sony. Sony has already released one game that was sold DD only and they are the first to bring a video game system to the market that will be 100% DD. That looks to me like Sony is pushing it further than any of the three console makers at this point. If you want to argue Microsoft pushed online community gaming and a sleek online interface on consoles to the market I can agree but I don't see it where direct download content is concerned. Do you think Sony would not have the PSN if MS had not gotten into the video game market? Of course they would.

The internet is much different than it was generations ago and there is much more broadband penetration so that isn't a fair statement. But this is exctly why I want to see the market stay balanced. You act as if MS is the only company to bring something to the console market. They all three push each other. It's not as one-sided as you're making it out to be. I've already given you an example where Nintendo pushed motion control and Sony is pushing the first DD only video game system.

Well now I don't get the argument anymore because this is just expanding my original point.

rein

09-23-2009, 06:05 PM

Well now I don't get the argument anymore because this is just expanding my original point.Well then I really got turned into circles. :p

Urizen

09-23-2009, 06:19 PM

What? Microsoft tried to buy Nintendo BEFORE the Gamecube launched. Nintendo's rejection is why the Xbox exists.

You were probably talking about this (http://www.edge-online.com/news/moore-ms-wanted-buy-nintendo).

I was talking about this (http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/04/commentary/game_over/column_gaming/).

Kelegacy

09-23-2009, 06:24 PM

People that would be happy about this for this worry me.

Widgetcraft

09-23-2009, 06:24 PM

Isn't it supposed to be very difficult for a foreign entity to buyout a Japanese company? I thought they had laws in place to prevent that from happening.

Mike Kelehan

09-23-2009, 06:29 PM

Maybe I'm wrong, but I think it'd be great if MS bought Nintendo. Nintendo can innovate all they want, and we'd play the results on Live in HD on our 360s. EA, on the other hand, wouldn't add much. Skip a step and outbid them for NFL exclusivity.

SilentScreams

09-23-2009, 06:34 PM

I would be interested in seeing this happen. It's about time this stupid console war was won.
At the end of the day, we would still get the games, so who cares?

Philonious

09-23-2009, 07:17 PM

I would be interested in seeing this happen. It's about time this stupid console war was won.
At the end of the day, we would still get the games, so who cares?

I think that the PS3 shows us what happens when a company THINKS it has all the power... Hell, Windows does in a way too, I guess. Bloated prices, bloated features and bloated design. Once someone wins they stop trying to compete, and we're left with the status quo. While I wouldn't mind a world with one console theoretically, I'd like to believe that competition keeps things fresh. Even if I don't like the Wii, I appreciate Nintendo's attempt at inovation.

crazyD

09-23-2009, 07:29 PM

I would be interested in seeing this happen. It's about time this stupid console war was won.
At the end of the day, we would still get the games, so who cares?

MS with full control would be a nightmare. They've pushed some serious shit with competition, and would drive the industry to the ground without it.

MagGnome

09-23-2009, 07:32 PM

They why aren't they putting Halo out on the PS3? Why can't I play Uncharted on my 360? Because exclusives sell systems, and systems move games. A 1st party game is always more valuable to a console maker than even the best 3rd party exclusive.

Really? Try telling that to Sega. ;)

Seriously, this would be horrible news if true. The last thing we need is for MS to become far and away the dominant player in the console market.

The less control every company has, the better.

Telefrog

09-23-2009, 07:33 PM

MS on the rumor:

We have no plans to acquire EA at this time.

Urizen

09-23-2009, 07:54 PM

MS on the rumor:

Funny. Earlier today someone asked me if I was interesting in buying EA. I had the exact same response.

Virtual Pariah

09-23-2009, 08:02 PM

Funny. Earlier today someone asked me if I was interesting in buying EA. I had the exact same response.

Really,
I intended to buy EA with the change I found in my couch.:D

Adam Blue

09-23-2009, 08:45 PM

MS on the rumor:

And Sony has no plans of a PS3 price drop. :p

In reality, it seems far-fetched to me, but I simply pointed out the things I did as to not totally disregard the rumor.

Zanzibar

09-23-2009, 08:46 PM

Really,
I intended to buy EA with the change I found in my couch.:D
If your name was Bill Gates, you just might.

While the PS3 has a fair amount of momentum right now, Microsoft is comfortable with its lead over the PS3. The main reason to do this is to prevent a competitor from getting a foothold, and the PS3 is far too far along to really do any damage by cutting off the Sony multiplatform versions at this stage - there's enough non-EA support for the PS3 to not make it worth it to Microsoft. If it was going to happen this year, it would have happened before Madden came out.

If this was going to happen AT ALL, it would happen shortly before the PS4 came out.

Philonious

09-23-2009, 09:21 PM

If it was going to happen this year, it would have happened before Madden came out.

...except that Madden is underperforming, which could influence a number of factors that end up making this the right time to buy.

PathMaster

09-23-2009, 09:21 PM

Okay, so its either Capcom or EA? Activision would also make sense to some. Who other companies should MS grab? Ideas? Personally I would think any purchases would be to enhance hardware not software.

fitbabits

09-23-2009, 09:46 PM

This is awesome!

Philonious

09-23-2009, 10:35 PM

This is awesome!

Hoping that people will FINALLY forget the last time something like this came up?

fitbabits

09-23-2009, 10:42 PM

Hoping that people will FINALLY forget the last time something like this came up?
I've long since given up hope of that. Some people are just too clever for their own good...or so they think.

Psykoboy2

09-23-2009, 11:18 PM

Really,
I intended to buy EA with the change I found in my couch.:D

EA....not Midway.

Wibble

09-24-2009, 04:43 AM

I see it!

Microsoft buys EA
EA gives Microsoft the keys
Microsoft finds Westwood tied up in the basement
NOX 2! yaaay! :)

Do not ruin my dreams >=(

Grifter

09-24-2009, 04:57 AM

I see it!

Microsoft buys EA
EA gives Microsoft the keys
Microsoft finds Westwood tied up in the basement
NOX 2! yaaay! :)

Do not ruin my dreams >=(

Screw NOX! We need another Lands of Lore.

Wibble

09-24-2009, 05:10 AM

Screw NOX! We need another Lands of Lore.

Blasphemy! Nox was some of the best Multiplayer I ever experienced, single player was admittedly a bit dull.

Little conjured traps chasing down a warrior never ceased to amuse me :)

But in the end I doubt anything that far gone is returning. Although it would have been hilarious to watch Nox 2 being released at the same time as Diablo 3. "Oh man.. AGAIN?! We waited TEN YEARS! :("

MagGnome

09-24-2009, 06:18 AM

Nox was a pretty fun game back in the day. It's not the first IP that EA's snuffed out that I'd want to see revived (see Dungeon Keeper), but it would be cool to see a new one. Still, it's probably best to let sleeping dogs lie.

The more I've thought about this the less sense it makes to me. I don't think this purchase would have the impact that some in this thread are predicting. I really doubt this would "end" the console "war". I could see Sony doing just fine without Madden and the like, especially since sales of Madden have been on something of a decline over the last few years. Besides, are PS3 sales really driven by sports titles? That seems more like Xbox territory to me this gen. Isn't the 360 the console for sports, shooters, and racing games? ;)

AgtFox

09-24-2009, 06:22 AM

Even though Madden sales may be sliding, it is still a multi-million unit selling title. Not a whole lot of games these days can say that. Add in FIFA, which sells millions worldwide and is usually the #1 overall seller, and it doesn't seem so crazy anymore.

Wraith

09-24-2009, 09:00 AM

Microsoft Says It Has 'No Plans To Acquire' Electronic Arts (http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090923-714333.html) (WSJ)

It just sort of cuts out there, but HardOCP (http://www.hardocp.com/news/2009/09/24/microsoft_says_has_no_plans_to_acquire_ea/) has the full quote.A Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) spokesman said late Wednesday that the software giant doesn't plan to acquire video-game publisher Electronic Arts Inc. (ERTS), contrary to rumors circulating earlier that sent shares of Electronic Arts more than 7% higher. "We have no plans to acquire EA," a Microsoft spokesman said.

AgtFox

09-24-2009, 09:36 AM

Microsoft Says It Has 'No Plans To Acquire' Electronic Arts (http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090923-714333.html) (WSJ)

It just sort of cuts out there, but HardOCP (http://www.hardocp.com/news/2009/09/24/microsoft_says_has_no_plans_to_acquire_ea/) has the full quote.
Sony also said "no plans to lower the price of the PS3" or "no PS3 Slim in development" when the leaks started coming out. Just saying this is standard procedure. They aren't going to come right out and say, "Hell yeah we're going to acquire EA" ;)

Gorvi

09-24-2009, 09:39 AM

At least if this happens I have a huge backlog to go through, but still, this would suck pretty damn hard.

wyeast

09-24-2009, 10:26 AM

If this meant the end of EA's insistence of using their own shitty craptastic servers :mad: for their games, I would at least be intrigued. :D

Doctor Setebos

09-24-2009, 10:28 AM

Sony also said "no plans to lower the price of the PS3" or "no PS3 Slim in development" when the leaks started coming out. Just saying this is standard procedure. They aren't going to come right out and say, "Hell yeah we're going to acquire EA" ;)They have to squash the rumor so the stock price per share goes back down. :D

ElektroDragon

09-24-2009, 12:50 PM

If true, this would be AWESOME! With rising unemployment and increased offshoring of US labor, Microsoft may have envisioned a day when we all live in little government provided hovels, with nothing to appease us but the self-medication and escape from reality that video games can provide.

Seriously though, this would be really great, in my opinion. Unfortunately, it is unlikely, as I believe MS is still very cagey about being unfairly labeled a monopoly.

ElektroDragon

09-24-2009, 12:52 PM

Blasphemy! Nox was some of the best Multiplayer I ever experienced, single player was admittedly a bit dull.

Little conjured traps chasing down a warrior never ceased to amuse me :)

But in the end I doubt anything that far gone is returning. Although it would have been hilarious to watch Nox 2 being released at the same time as Diablo 3. "Oh man.. AGAIN?! We waited TEN YEARS! :("

I agree, Nox was indeed fantastic, with very fun multiplayer.

crazyD

09-24-2009, 01:02 PM

Seriously though, this would be really great, in my opinion. Unfortunately, it is unlikely, as I believe MS is still very cagey about being unfairly labeled a monopoly.

How would one console made by a very controlling company owning the second largest game publisher in the world be a good thing? I am seeing nothing positive about it at all.

TheFlyingOrc

09-24-2009, 01:10 PM

How would one console made by a very controlling company owning the second largest game publisher in the world be a good thing? I am seeing nothing positive about it at all.

The only thing I'm getting positive is that, as a console warrior in my spare time, I'd like to see Sony do more poorly. I can't think of any way it will start benefitting me directly, that's for sure. :)