Microsoft may acquire Activision Blizzard? That would be bad for everyone else

4 mins read

One of the parties rumoured to be in discussions with Vivendi to acquire Activision Blizzard, following the news that it may well be up for sale, is Microsoft.

This would be bad news for both Sony and Nintendo, and even Apple. Love it or hate it, Activision Blizzard is the real deal when it comes to the games industry. It is the one that produces the mega-blockbusters, and every console needs those.

Call of Duty is the obvious franchise that would be a big loss to everyone. A console without a Call of Duty release is a console that is missing out on a big piece of the annual revenue of the entire industry. And that, in turn, would strengthen Microsoft, as it would be a genuine console-seller.

But it’s the other games that the Microsoft competitors would miss out on where the real worry lies here for Microsoft’s competitors. People often forget that Activision produces some very big, very important and very innovative games that pull is massive revenue and sell systems. Consider Spiderman – that’s a very valuable license that Activision currently owns. Or Skylanders – a number #1 selling game on the iPad, and just like the best collectible card games (Magic: The Gathering), a game that has a very high level of engagement from customers. Given that Microsoft wants the Xbox to be a console for the whole family, Skylanders would be a massive IP acquisition to that end, too.

And then there’s the James Bond license. That’s a very valuable IP in itself. Consider how popular the remake of Goldeneye 007 was – it was possibly the biggest third-party release on the Nintendo Wii in terms of hype and critical expectation. A console without a Bond game is also a console missing out.

Or consider Transformers, Cabela, Rapala, Marvel and all those licensed games that Activision publishes – Shrek, Madagascar, Kung-Fu Panda. This games aren’t often good, but they don’t need to be. If they’re sitting there on the retail shelf exclusive to Microsoft, then they’re going to encourage fans of those IPs to buy an Xbox, not a Nintendo or PlayStation console.

And, finally, here’s one area I think everyone in the west is ignoring – Microsoft will gain a new lease on life in Japan. Of all the western publishers, it is Activision that is proving to be the most successful. Call of Duty actually manages to sell copies in Japan, and that’s a rapidly growing market. In other words, the Japanese are just starting to realise the thrills of the FPS, and if Microsoft had the biggest games in the genre exclusive to its platform? Well, that’s going to eat away at a market that Sony and Nintendo both rely very heavily on.

Gamasutra outlines why Microsoft might not be wise to make this acquisition, and there are a couple of other companies that would be just as interested in picking up Kotick’s company, but we’re in for some interesting times is acquisition-happy Microsoft is the eventual buyer.

This is the bio under which all legacy articles are published (as in the 12,000-odd, before we moved to the new Website and platform). This is not a member of the DDNet Team. Please see the article's text for byline attribution.

  • It would actually be quite clever for Microsoft to buy Activision. Why? Well, they own so many other studios! Infinity Ward, Treyarch and Sledgehammer Games just to name a few.

    To be honest I really dislike Activision for buying up and ruining other companies, so I hope Microsoft does the same to them as they shouldn't have did to Retro; run them into the ground.

  • Retro? You mean "Rare," right? 😉

    I agree that buying Activision would be a great move by Microsoft, personally. I understand what Gamasutra was saying, that it might put off some third party developers, but when you own the most important third party developer, does that matter so much?

    I would argue not.

  • You know, I really hope that this doesn't happen, mostly because this would discourage Microsoft from getting rid of the money-sucking, greed-driven thing of a pointless entity that is Xbox Live. Yes, you can argue that everything was kept in-house, but you can also argue that its 60 US dollars a year when the competitors are allowing anybody to use the internet that they are already paying for. If Microsoft had the biggest yearly frag-fest of the first-person shooter genre, they would absolutely see no reason as to get rid of their money-sucking scheme of Xbox Live.

  • I think that this is a terrible move for activision to let microsoft buy it, Think about it its simple math sell a game on one console or one several where would you make more money? plus think about the fans for once

  • Previous Story

    And the Frequent Flyer Rewards keep rolling in!

    Next Story

    Trailer: Assassin’s Creed Liberation on Vita looks fine

    Latest Articles