PlayStation Buys Bungie

[zt1903]

 

[zt1903]

It's not big at all, in any way or shape. The only thing that is big is how much as Sony paying for a bunch of developers. BIG would have been Sony going after Konami, SquareEnix or Capcom, that would have been a statement after Microsoft got Activision and Bethesda.

It is a big deal by any reasonable definition.

It is not as big a deal as either Activision or Bethesda. But neither is it a response to either of those deals. This deal would have been in discussion since long before Activision was announced and possibly even pre-Bethesda. These deals take a long time to agree in principle and that’s before you get into the legals and due diligence ahead of an announcement.

Sony have done this deal for reasons that fit with their strategy and the benefits are obvious. The deal stands on its own merits.

I suspect there’s more to come, I posted a while back that Sony have got billions set aside for acquiring content - circa $20 billion over 3 years was publicly announced - and most of that will be for gaming.

I would not be surprised to see something in relation to one or more of Square Enix, Capcom, Kadokawa or the gaming assets of Konami.

 

[p9ul]

I think this is Sony increasing its presence in multiplayer - much like Microsoft buying Bethesda to increase its presence in single player.

Bungie has stated the deal lets it expand it's media potential, which suggests to me that a Destiny movie will appear at some point, following in the footsteps of Uncharted and The Last of Us. (a movie based on Horizon could be awesome!)

However big MS / Xbox is - it doesnt have the movie making history that Sony can boast.

I also didn't realise that a recent in-game event in Destiny (Bungie's 30th anniversary) had content cut on the Xbox side - which is rumoured to stem from the Activision purchase - and Destiny's expansion packs have been removed from Game Pass.

Destiny's fanbase on Xbox has always been much lower than PlayStation & PC - (somewhere around 20%?). While Sony have said that it won't be taking the game exclusive, I'd be suprised if it doesn't try to erode that percentage even further in some way.

 

[Houghsx]

I don’t know why people keep referring to this as a statement or retaliation to the MS deal. It really isn’t, it’s business.

 

[iwb100]

I think this is Sony increasing its presence in multiplayer - much like Microsoft buying Bethesda to increase its presence in single player.

Bungie has stated the deal lets it expand it's media potential, which suggests to me that a Destiny movie will appear at some point, following in the footsteps of Uncharted and The Last of Us. (a movie based on Horizon could be awesome!)

However big MS / Xbox is - it doesnt have the movie making history that Sony can boast.

I also didn't realise that a recent in-game event in Destiny (Bungie's 30th anniversary) had content cut on the Xbox side - which is rumoured to stem from the Activision purchase - and Destiny's expansion packs have been removed from Game Pass.

Destiny's fanbase on Xbox has always been much lower than PlayStation & PC - (somewhere around 20%?). While Sony have said that it won't be taking the game exclusive, I'd be suprised if it doesn't try to erode that percentage even further in some way.

We got numbers on destiny 2’s player base split yesterday. A daily cut…..

• 275,000 on Xbox
• 355,000 on PlayStation
• 224,000 on Steam
• 5,390 on Stadia

Which would suggest that it’s pretty evenly played across the three platforms. Shame for stadia though.

 

[OldSnake]

Great buy for Sony.

Live service games generate way more cash than their usual WWS one and done single player games. Bungie know how to make live service games. Hopefully Sony can bring some of their quality from the single player stuff And meet in the middle.

It looks like Sony are going hard on live service

PlayStation plans to launch more than 10 live service games before March 2026

Sony will launch more than 10 new live service games over the next four years, it has said - just days after announcing…

www.eurogamer.net

guess that’s the great revenue stream from LS games, but I hope it doesn’t distract from WWS studios getting time to work on the single player stuff that I love from Sony. Seems when the revenue from a live service game is seen, the desire to make the story driven stuff dries up or is just not given time anymore (gta v content vs online). Live service games do need constant content and keeping fresh. and with 10 that’s a big plan

hope they don’t forget about the single player epics but still a great buy for Sony - cant be long until Spartacus breaks cover now can it…?

 

[iwb100]

I don’t know why people keep referring to this as a statement or retaliation to the MS deal. It really isn’t, it’s business.

It amuses me that people haven’t figured out that Sony and Ms aren’t fighting each other anymore but working together to try and protect the gaming brands they have from the other big tech piranhas out there.

I’d take a look at what Phil Spencer said the other month…Sony, Nintendo and Xbox all trust each other to do what’s right for gaming. Obviously implying that they are all worried about the ‘meta verse’ etc threats coming over the horizon and potentially the challenges from China.

To grow the industry needs to expand into new markets especially mobile and services but that’s where they hit the Amazons, facebooks and Google’s plus tencent etc…these moves are clearly about protecting gaming development resources and IP and tools from slipping out of the core gaming space and effectively console developers being locked to a market with relatively low growth potential in isolation.

If this was 2005 immediately cod and destiny would be being paraded as exclusives to the platform holder who acquired them. They are not and that tells us, along with Phil’s words and statements from each company exactly what this is about.

 

[Cha1ky]

I also didn't realise that a recent in-game event in Destiny (Bungie's 30th anniversary) had content cut on the Xbox side

What was cut on the Xbox side?

 

[OldSnake]

I’d take a look at what Phil Spencer said the other month…Sony, Nintendo and Xbox all trust each other to do what’s right for gaming. Obviously implying that they are all worried about the ‘meta verse’ etc threats coming over the horizon and potentially the challenges from China.

To grow the industry needs to expand into new markets especially mobile and services but that’s where they hit the Amazons, facebooks and Google’s plus tencent etc…these moves are clearly about protecting gaming development resources and IP and tools from slipping out of the core gaming space and effectively console developers being locked to a market with relatively growth potential.

yeah I do tend agree with this. I don’t mean to go off topic but ‘sony ms and Nintendo have ‘mutual understanding that they want games to work and retain the tech and talent the space has as being salient.

eg

meta nee Facebook, if they want to get their meta verse going, which is essentially stage one is what they have now just with a graphic front end. Eg You don’t have a list of facebook chats, intead in the meta verse you ’walk’ into the bar and chat with the the people of your friend list. Tv or headset even Better
i don’t think the Meta Facebook vision of the meta verse /= the blockchain vision (eg decentraland).

so what’s to stop meta buying epic and using unreal 5 ( I mean you’ve see the matrix demo, right?) to build out quickly meta cities (ue5 builder is fast). they have so much money relative the whole of the gaming space, that tech might start to be itersted with meta verse use first. Maybe next version is not for games. or maybe the games made the engine can be played in the Facebook meta verse

The meta verse will Need a lot of what gaming has pioneered. They’ve got lots of cash. It really is time to see gaming, Sony, Nintendo and MS as a group the battle isn’t between us it’s more to hold and keep getting talent, grow the user base to support that (Sony see, games on pc, buying dev and ip). I want that to be these three guys talking it on with some health rivally. Not meta or bezos just roll in and buy everything eg tech and talent, from underneath our established platform holder.

 

[iwb100]

yeah I do tend agree with this. I don’t mean to go off topic but ‘sony ms and Nintendo have ‘mutual understanding that they want games to work and retain the tech and talent the space has as being salient.

eg

meta nee Facebook, if they want to get their meta verse going, which is essentially stage one is what they have now just with a graphic front end. Eg You don’t have a list of facebook chats, intead in the meta verse you ’walk’ into the bar and chat with the the people of your friend list. Tv or headset even Better
i don’t think the Meta Facebook vision of the meta verse /= the blockchain vision (eg decentraland).

so what’s to stop meta buying epic and using unreal 5 ( I mean you’ve see the matrix demo, right?) to build out quickly meta cities (ue5 builder is fast). they have so much money relative the whole of the gaming space, that tech might start to be itersted with meta verse use first. Maybe next version is not for games. or maybe the games made the engine can be played in the Facebook meta verse

The meta verse will Need a lot of what gaming has pioneered. They’ve got lots of cash. It really is time to see gaming, Sony, Nintendo and MS as a group the battle isn’t between us it’s more to hold and keep getting talent, grow the user base to support that (Sony see, games on pc, buying dev and ip). I want that to be these three guys talking it on with some health rivally. Not meta or bezos just roll in and buy everything eg tech and talent, from underneath our established platform holder.

Yep. This has been obvious for a while. Sony did a deal to use MS azure development for gaming.

The space gaming is increasingly moving into is meeting resistance and either Sony, Xbox and Nintendo take it there or they let others who don’t have the same traditions have that space and probably completely take over.

These recent acquisitions and their portrayal show that the battle for space in gaming is not between console makers at all.

 

[p9ul]

What was cut on the Xbox side?

I'm not entirely sure to be honest - it was mentioned on Aztecross' youtube channel. It sounds like it was something so minor that no one noticed.

 

[zt1903]

Also, re multi-platform. Jim Ryan has talked a lot about MP the last few days, in most cases he means PS + PC just as Phil Spencer means Xbox + PC. Destiny may remain all platforms but I’m sure you’ll start to see better/first on PlayStation, PlayStation exclusive content, etc.

I expect the same thing to happen with COD

 

[iwb100]

Also, re multi-platform. Jim Ryan has talked a lot about MP the last few days, in most cases he means PS + PC just as Phil Spencer means Xbox + PC. Destiny may remain all platforms but I’m sure you’ll start to see better/first on PlayStation, PlayStation exclusive content, etc.

I expect the same thing to happen with COD

The real money in live service games is with volume and user engagement (spending money). It makes no sense really for either to restrict them. Though they will of course heavily incentivise them via their own services platforms to drive people towards them.

These guys want to print the money games like fortnite do. And you want maximum users for that. The old drive people to our hardware is done. It’s drive people to our services regardless or hardware.

 

[zt1903]

Which is why I said multiplayer and not live service. Across the portfolio there will be different decisions on different games for a whole host of reasons.

I expect to see significant attention on mobile, for example, as they’re leaving a lot of money on the table there. But I’m not remotely excited by that.

I do wonder if Sony regret selling off SOE. Can’t help but feel that Evrequest, Planetside, DCUO, etc would be a great fit for PlayStation right now. Don’t think Jim Ryan would have done that deal.

 

[iwb100]

Which is why I said multiplayer and not live service. Across the portfolio there will be different decisions on different games for a whole host of reasons.

I expect to see significant attention on mobile, for example, as they’re leaving a lot of money on the table there. But I’m not remotely excited by that.

I do wonder if Sony regret selling off SOE. Can’t help but feel that Evrequest, Planetside, DCUO, etc would be a great fit for PlayStation right now. Don’t think Jim Ryan would have done that deal.

Yeah don’t disagree. But Bungie portfolio is Destiny 2 plus another life service style game as far as we know. Don’t think their portfolio will be more than that in next decade.

 

[zt1903]

Yeah don’t disagree. But Bungie portfolio is Destiny 2 plus another life service style game as far as we know. Don’t think their portfolio will be more than that in next decade.

Yeah agree, I have no doubt that Destiny and Bungie's next game will be on all platforms. But I was referencing Jim Ryan interview which was talking about more than Bungie and multi-platform more generally.

Both Ryan and Spencer are very loose when they talk multi-platform and it’s not consistent and it generally means whatever they want it to mean at the time for PR purposes.

 

[iwb100]

Yeah agree, I have no doubt that Destiny and Bungie's next game will be on all platforms. But I was referencing Jim Ryan interview which was talking about more than Bungie and multi-platform more generally.

Both Ryan and Spencer are very loose when they talk multi-platform and it’s not consistent and it generally means whatever they want it to mean at the time for PR purposes.

Sure. It’s going to come down to services and not hardware. I fully expect next gen there will be little distinction in hardware at all.

 

[Stockpile Thomas]

Much sabre rattling going on in the FPS market which doesn’t really concern me

Im not sure what’s going to happen with other major IPs then I’ll sit up and take notice.

I‘m actually quite glad about MS’s major acquisitions because it levels the playing field a bit and is good for us all ultimately. Much as I love my PlayStation, I don’t want Sony being too dominant and getting complacent and not delivering as good a product/experience as they might do.

For instance, Gamepass is fantastic and it has pushed Sony to respond (to what extent remains to be seen).

 

[Fe_man2000]

I don’t want Sony being too dominant and getting complacent and not delivering as good a product/experience as they might do

There well down that road, Hopefully this pulls things back. Sony need a kick up the bum and start raising there game (ironically there games are the only things they are getting right its everything else their messing up)

 

[lee667]

There well down that road, Hopefully this pulls things back. Sony need a kick up the bum and start raising there game (ironically there games are the only things they are getting right its everything else their messing up)

What part of their game are you wanting them to up because the ps5 is apparently outselling the series x, you mention the games are fine so what else do you expect them to better?

Then there's the release of VR2, don't see MS releasing things like that, even though it might be seen as a gimmick.

If it's acquisitions then you're going to be disappointed because Sony have nowhere near as much disposable cash as MS.

X box players have been spoiled with gamepass because its been incredible value. Question is, how many will continue to pay for it when the price inevitably rises due to the inclusion of CoD, for example?

Is it good value for money if the price increases 50% - 100% per month because they've added CoD on day 1 but you don't play it?

 

[Caljo]

What part of their game are you wanting them to up because the ps5 is apparently outselling the series x, you mention the games are fine so what else do you expect them to better?

Then there's the release of VR2, don't see MS releasing things like that, even though it might be seen as a gimmick.

If it's acquisitions then you're going to be disappointed because Sony have nowhere near as much disposable cash as MS.

X box players have been spoiled with gamepass because its been incredible value. Question is, how many will continue to pay for it when the price inevitably rises due to the inclusion of CoD, for example?

Is it good value for money if the price increases 50% - 100% per month because they've added CoD on day 1 but you don't play it?

It’s what’s now referred to as the Game Pass Effect.

More and more gamers feel entitled to ‘free’ games and now balk at the idea of paying for a new AAA title (“£70 ***!?”).

You can’t put a price on enjoyment. One person’s trash is another person’s treasure. Horses for courses. Each to their own. Etc etc etc......

 

[Fe_man2000]

You highlight the problem perfectly Lee - PS5's are selling so well Sony has little motivation to actually improve the console to sell more, so it will only happen if there is decent competition or possibly it wont happen ever which would be worse.

Not sure what Gamepass or that other stuff your bringing up has to do with what I am talking about, I think that's another part of a different conversation.

Sony need to improve, in my opinion, their sound and display support by adding

• VRR - this is a big one and possibly only going to work if ever on Sony TV's
• Dolby Atmos
• Dolby Vision
• 1440p support - the most popular monitor resolution.

Quality of life stuff

• Quick resume - proper quick resume not single game suspend (which is good but not great)
• Allow 3rd party controllers - I don't feel strongly about this but others may , its nice to have choice.
• Price of games at £70 - they can do so they did.
• Folders - again not a big deal for me but they do seem to have gone backwards on the OS features a bit.
• personally I would like to see more PS5 upgrades for PS4 games as standalone downloads and for free and less £10-£20 ones where we bundled the DLC and the PS5 upgrade. If you want to sell me DLC, sell me DLC If its good I will buy it but dont make me have to buy it as the only way to access a res bump or faster loading - that was why you pushed the PS5 in the first place. I shouldnt have to pay to use its supposed to be used.

There Games are great which lets face it is what the console if for and they have some things nailed finally like the storage upgrades. I have just finished Ghost of Tsushima and will be getting Horizon when its out so I like my PS5 but I feel its sales leader position is making Sony not try as hard as they could in areas outside of the games they have - I dont want Sony to "fail" I want them improve so my Playstation is better. Its also why I use my Xbox more and always for mulitplatform games - its generally better at them.

 

[lee667]

You highlight the problem perfectly Lee - PS5's are selling so well Sony has little motivation to actually improve the console to sell more, so it will only happen if there is decent competition or possibly it wont happen ever which would be worse.

Not sure what Gamepass or that other stuff your bringing up has to do with what I am talking about, I think that's another part of a different conversation.

Sony need to improve, in my opinion, their sound and display support by adding

• VRR - this is a big one and possibly only going to work if ever on Sony TV's
• Dolby Atmos
• Dolby Vision
• 1440p support - the most popular monitor resolution.

Quality of life stuff

• Quick resume - proper quick resume not single game suspend (which is good but not great)
• Allow 3rd party controllers - I don't feel strongly about this but others may , its nice to have choice.
• Price of games at £70 - they can do so they did.
• Folders - again not a big deal for me but they do seem to have gone backwards on the OS features a bit.
• personally I would like to see more PS5 upgrades for PS4 games as standalone downloads and for free and less £10-£20 ones where we bundled the DLC and the PS5 upgrade. If you want to sell me DLC, sell me DLC If its good I will buy it but dont make me have to buy it as the only way to access a res bump or faster loading - that was why you pushed the PS5 in the first place. I shouldnt have to pay to use its supposed to be used.

There Games are great which lets face it is what the console if for and they have some things nailed finally like the storage upgrades. I have just finished Ghost of Tsushima and will be getting Horizon when its out so I like my PS5 but I feel its sales leader position is making Sony not try as hard as they could in areas outside of the games they have - I dont want Sony to "fail" I want them improve so my Playstation is better. Its also why I use my Xbox more and always for mulitplatform games - its generally better at them.

I'd be very surprised to see dolby vision or atmos unless Sony decide to stump up whatever dolby want for the license.

VRR and 1440P will eventually come but at this moment in time the people who would benefit are in the minority at the minute.

I don't think Sony are resting on their laurels, if dolby want a crazy amount of money for the vision and atmos licenses then why should they stump up now if a large chunk of users won't get the benefit of it. Give it a year and that could change.

Some of those QoL things may happen, I can't say that I'm missing folders so not fussed if they never came back and I'm sure they'll be some future 3rd party controller support but again it's a bonus not a necessity.

 

[Fe_man2000]

Yeah non of them are deal breakers, its a list of small things but. The only ones I really want are the VRR as I think that is really needed, the Quick resume and I as sometimes use my PC monitor with the PS5 when the wife is on the OLED, so I am one of the 1440p minority.

 

[PandaZ]

Hmmm, not sure how to feel about it