Microsoft bought Blizzard...GGG next?

"

Phrazz wrote:

I mean, what?

Are we comparing GGG with its 150 employee to Activision Blizzard's 10.000 like it's somewhat comparable? Not to mention that Activision Blizzard has several hard-hitting IP's, while GGG has one F2P game?

The only thing we can hope for here, is that Microsoft utilizes the Scorched earth tactic on Activision Blizzard, and uses their name and position to make some quality games.

That kind of hurts man. They've made some bad decisions with some of the games they've made, but they were still #1 in America, and now Microsoft is attempting to become Tencent, and use them. They do have a lot of active popular games. They just screwed up with this sector and Battle.net

How the fuck did this reach 5 pages?

Microsoft bargain binning a dumpster fire full of wasted gems was far from surprising. Them making a grab at a pretty minor league alsoran ARPG (in terms of legacy, PoE did not dethrone Diablo and few non-Exiles even know what Wraeclast is) owned by Tencent RIGHT AFTER acquiring Diablo itself is sort of ridiculous.

Not to say I wouldn't find the irony hilarious if Microsoft somehow pulled it off, snatched GGG from Tencent and set the good folks at M$GGG to making a true Diablo game (as if Blizz didn't already poach ARPG devs way back when D4 wasn't even announced)...but yeah, come on. Exiles are just so weirdly heliocentric sometimes.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Exiles are just so weirdly heliocentric sometimes.

Terracentric, surely? Heliocentric accomplishes at least the key mental step.

To the rest of it... yes. Viewing a $68bn takeover as a precursor to, um, buying a (maybe) $150m subsidiary from a competitor is both unrealistic and bathetic in the extreme.

"

rekikyo wrote:

That kind of hurts man. They've made some bad decisions with some of the games they've made, but they were still #1 in America, and now Microsoft is attempting to become Tencent, and use them. They do have a lot of active popular games. They just screwed up with this sector and Battle.net

...Not to mention that the whole company seems to be rotting from the inside?

Look, all companies these days, are trying to make as much money as they can. Just how it is; after all, they're in the money-making business. But dear, old Kotick seems to be heavily directing development into genres/project where the profit potential is largest. So we're no longer talking about "make as much money as you can off of your games", but to "make games to earn as much money as you can". WC4? SC3? Would make HUGE bank just off of the IP alone. But... Not enough bank, as they can make more bank in the FPS/MMO/Mobile landscape, and not "dead" genres.

Economical smart? Of course, but you can't really be surprised if some of the "spark" and enthusiasm get lost along the way, which in my mind, has happened. No one is claiming that they don't have talent over there, because they have. The talent is just directed away from what matters.

"

Varana wrote:

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Exiles are just so weirdly heliocentric sometimes.

Terracentric, surely? Heliocentric accomplishes at least the key mental step.

To the rest of it... yes. Viewing a $68bn takeover as a precursor to, um, buying a (maybe) $150m subsidiary from a competitor is both unrealistic and bathetic in the extreme.

As long as the basic mental image of collective egocentricity (at the risk of invoking a contradiction in terms) I am content with either. Although terracentric implies Wraeclast is on Earth which...eh I dunno. Mundocentric? My Latin is totally not up to this one. After all, it should probably be Plummeting Ursus, not Ursa.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

"

Varana wrote:

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Exiles are just so weirdly heliocentric sometimes.

Terracentric, surely? Heliocentric accomplishes at least the key mental step.

To the rest of it... yes. Viewing a $68bn takeover as a precursor to, um, buying a (maybe) $150m subsidiary from a competitor is both unrealistic and bathetic in the extreme.

As long as the basic mental image of collective egocentricity (at the risk of invoking a contradiction in terms) I am content with either. Although terracentric implies Wraeclast is on Earth which...eh I dunno. Mundocentric? My Latin is totally not up to this one. After all, it should probably be Plummeting Ursus, not Ursa.

A reframing is in order then, the rumour is Microsoft has greater possibility of buying EA than GGG.

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Although terracentric implies Wraeclast is on Earth which...eh I dunno. Mundocentric? My Latin is totally not up to this one. After all, it should probably be Plummeting Ursus, not Ursa.

Heliocentric comes from old Greek "helios", so either terracentric or mundocentric, while technically correct, would be a bit strange, given both "terra" and "mundus" are Latin.
So it should be geocentric.

As for the Plummeting Ursa... that's correct, assuming they are female bears.

"

Mikrotherion wrote:

"

Foreverhappychan wrote:

Although terracentric implies Wraeclast is on Earth which...eh I dunno. Mundocentric? My Latin is totally not up to this one. After all, it should probably be Plummeting Ursus, not Ursa.

Heliocentric comes from old Greek "helios", so either terracentric or mundocentric, while technically correct, would be a bit strange, given both "terra" and "mundus" are Latin.
So it should be geocentric.

As for the Plummeting Ursa... that's correct, assuming they are female bears.

As was noted, we had to pivot from a solar centre to an earthly one, given there is some truth to heliocentricity, at a certain level.

Geocentric did occur to me but by (lack of) virtue of contemporary usage I thought it would come across too much like someone obsessed with rocks or maps. And yes, I know there are Latin terms for both. :P

I don't think they're all female but the boss version I had in mind was definitely one mean mother...

Purchase is IP driven and timing triggered.

Microsoft needs TITLES. Both Activision and Blizzard have been letting their IPs and teams rot for years. With the scandals making the purchase cheap.

MS just needs to restructure, rebrand, and execute. Which they're well positioned to do with Kotick and many of the execs onboard exiting stage right. Pockets full of cash.

GGG seems too small of a fish because it only has one game. Blizzard on the other hand has several popular titles and all of them have microtransactions which present great opportunity to milk that cow a lot.