Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft to Buy Vivendi Games Division?
Unknown Relic writes "While far from confirmed, it is reported that Microsoft is seriously looking into buying, or
may have already bought, Vivendi's Games Division. For those who aren't aware, Vivendi owns several prominent gaming companies, including Valve and Blizzard! While no official announcements have been made, one is apparently expected soon. While this would doubtlessly be a great boon to Xbox's library, it could be a shock to other consoles as titles which were originally planned for a diverse release become Xbox exclusives."
Microsoft Buys Vivendi? 9:40 AM - Andrew "Andy" Burnes - Game Biz.: General News - (119)
Well I was sitting on the fence with regards to posting this earlier after I heard of this from various sources but now Computer & Video Games has posted the story. As the article mentions this would mean that Microsoft would control the publishing rights of Half-Life and this would certainly make the rumour of Half-Life 2 being Xbox exclusive more of a reality:
If insider speculation is to be believed, Microsoft has bought US publisher Vivendi, with an announcement to that effect due soon. Take a deep breath and reflect on the implications of that, if true.
Half-Life 2, Warcraft, Counter-Strike, Crash, Spyro, Lord of the Rings... Vivendi has an enormous portfolio boasting some of the biggest titles on all formats, and it would be an ultra-smart move on Microsoft's part to snap them up. Such a buyout, of course, would come at a terrifically high price, making the 365 million acquisition of Rare look like peanuts. But if anyone has the necessary funds, it's Microsoft.
Furthermore, an email from Universal was accidentally sent out to developers last week stating that all work on GBA titles should be suspended. The email was promptly recalled and branded an error, but could it be that this was in some way tied in with this alleged deal?
We contacted Vivendi for comment and a spokesperson told us: "We've heard all sorts of rumours over the past months - Activision, EA and many more. They'd all like to get their hands on Blizzard. I guess Microsoft are one of the few companies that has enough money."
If this is true as various sectors of the press believe then we should be seeing an official announcement on Friday. So Microsoft now has its hands in Valve, Blizzard and others if this is true... Dark times or more security for developers considering Vivendi's habit of dropping underperforming studios?
I am me...I think
So much for linux releases of Counter-Strike server, or Mac versions of Diablo/Starcraft/Warcraft.
Well this makes the quote that Bill Gates said they couldn't be a monopoly because they weren't in the game console market as well, even more funny...
Vivendi does not own Valve, Sierra published Half-Life and it stands to reason they'll publish whatever else Valve does, but they don't own them.
Schnapple
This means we'll see Commander Clippy on the battlefield in StarCraft II. :/
Great. Now more PC games like Halo can be hijacked in a desperate to promote the X-Box.
"Mind, as manifested by the capacity to make choices, is to some extent present in every electron." -Freeman Dyson
I know they are desperate and only a year ago their was a total of 7 games for the xbox and that was it. They sell each unit at a $150 loss and are actually paying developers not to release games for the competition. Does anyone see a future monopoly here?
Sega is gone and nintendo might be next. Sony will take a long time to kill but its possible ms can majorily harm it.
Again it relates to Microsoft using money obtained from one monopoly and using it to crush competition in another which is illegal under the sherman anti trust act.
What really sucks is the drm signed code that is required to run a game. This makes ms the gatekeeper. If they were smart they would make it free for anyone to write games for it and then use the signed code feature on the xbox-2.
http://saveie6.com/
If this is true, this could indicate that Microsoft is ready to go on another spending spree and part with some of that $40 billion dollars. I suspect that they'll start buying companies up again, now that they've won/lost the anti-trust case. They waited a while for things to cool down, and now they are going to heat things up again as it were.
Sony should terrify MS. The playstation is rapidly starting to evolve into the long awaited "computing appliance" and it doesn't run windows (tho it can run linux).
You're darn right MS will lose billions on xbox and will use it's multi-billion dollar slush fund to line up as many key players on its court as possible because when game consoles start doing word processing and browsing the internet, guess who wants to the OS you use to do it?
Buying vivindi and getting Blizzard (!!!!) and Valve and every fantasy MMORPG (present and near future including World of Warcraft, Eve, and MIDDLE EARTH ONLINE) that ISN'T everquest is just a perfect match from Microsoft's perspective.
Rumors of buyouts have been swarming the gaming world recently. Nintendo will buy Sega. Microsoft will buy Sega. Nintendo will buy Capcom. EA will buy Capcom. Nintendo will buy Sega AND Capcom. Microsoft will buy Nintendo. Sony will buy General Electric (ok, so I just made that last one up). You get the idea.
Please. Until you read about this from Microsoft, Vivendi, or on legit gaming sites, assume that somebody made this crap up and are just looking for web traffic.
Vivendi CEO Jean-René Fourtou has told shareholders that the company will undergo restructuring and that some parts of it will be sold off, but he has no intention of selling Vivendi's game divisions.
Vivendi is in financial debt and company executives had previously stated that they were considering selling off their profitable gaming divisions, which include Blizzard and Valve.
Despite everyone's assumptions, nothing called "Half-Life 2" has ever been announced or talked about by anyone connected with Valve. Team Fortress 2 has been shown publicly, however.
No Warcraft for you, heretic!
---If you can't trust a nerd, who can you trust?
What you say is true, but Sierra does have the first refusal rights to publish a Half-Life sequel, per the original publishing contract. And there will, without a doubt, be a Half Life 2, there's just no way the companies involved could resist such a surefire hit. It might not be out this year, but it will be released.
If some re$ources get put behind proper games (e.g. Blizzard) in time to fend off the onslaught of f*cking Sims and footbal titles from EA, that's a GOOD THING.
Also, if a mysterious virus passed via game packaging suddenly wipes out the hordes of spotty drones who cluster around the whole shelves of EA Sims'n'Sports games at the local game store, that's an even BETTER THING.
Give gaming back to the geeks! And yes, MS are geeks.
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
Ever consider thinking before posting? Microsoft has owned www.zone.com for YEARS now and they only charge for 'premium' games, like Asheron's Call. For online retail game matching (ala Battle.net), NO CHARGE! Never has been.
Hotmail still exists and is still free. Microsoft's own gaming site, the Zone is free too.
This information makes me think that in fact Microsoft would keep battle net free.
This seems like a premature move on Microsoft's part. Sure, they have more money than Ft. Knox, and can buy whatever they want, but this is obviously to shore up the Xbox.
What's more interesting is that this is a wildcard for Microsoft--they can buy these companies as a ploy to make people think they are shoring up the next generation of Xbox games, and then put out tons of (high quality) PC games, dominating a market that no one thought they wanted.
Is Sony going to start buying up development now too? Has the rush on game developers begun?
--My other sig is a ferrari.
This could be the spark of some real creativity as a slew of ideas gets to be tried.
A game franchise is only a franchise for so long. We need new franchises. There is 50Mu PS2's out there vs 8.3Mu for Xbox.
This means that new idea can make money with a low penetration PS2, something that is not possible for Xbox. Say, 1% equates to half a million titles sold for the Sony camp or 80K for MS. Where would you put your bet?
Help fight continental drift.
"Pinky, you've left the lens cap of your mind on again." - P&TB
"I can see my house from here!" - ST:
"Hey, It looks like you're trying to rush the Terran Base! Would you like help with that?"
Considering Vivendi (being the owner of Blizzard) is suing the bnetd.org folks releasing their own open source reversed engineered replacement for battle.net (Blizzard's) servers, I think Vivendi and Microsoft ought to see eye to eye on most issues! I've been boycotting Blizzard for over a year now.
See subject.
Viewsonic said, "Why would this be bad? Vivendi make **PC** games.Not console games! Both mediums are entirely different. Trying to mix the two together would be a horrible mistake. I know Microsoft needs games, but come on, who the heck wants to play games that were designed for PCs?"
Mircosoft has done a really good job ignoring consumers and doing what they feel will be the best for their market share. While no one wants to play computer games for PCs, if Microsoft felt they could increase XBOX sales by releasing exlusives (which they probably could) do you honestly think they wouldn't do it?
What's to stop them from releasing a "XBOX Commander" (like their failed PC RTS controller) and releasing Starcraft II as an XBOX exclusive? If they buy the company that makes the game, then nothing. They could even release a RTS game for the XBOX and just have crippled controls using the XBOX controller.
"They're treating it like all games PC games are couch potato games, which they most certainly are NOT."
That's the whole point. Personaly, I think console first person shooters are a crime against nature. Sniping with a controller? HA! Give me a mouse and a keyboard any day. (I know Microsoft is not the only one releasing FPS games on consoles.) The point is companies are ignorring the difference in the advantages of keyboard/mouse vs. controller, and the ability to 'fun-ly' play Diablo II on computer compared to Legend of Zelda on a console.
Personally, I don't want to see the two cross over. I hope to Jebus this buyout won't happen, partially because I hate to see anything that gives Microsoft an advantage, but more because I think it will result in poor games. When you try to make a PC game for a console or a console game for a PC, the gamer usually ends up with the short end of the stick.
-Trillian
We can't have Diablo III running under Winex now, can we?
Buy 'em out, boys! (cue maniacal laughter)
microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
Yes, the point is that there will suddenly be no more releases of them, patches won't be supported, basically all Mac and Linux development in those directions will die off.
That's gotta fit into your schema somewhere
If this is true then only a few people know about it. I work at Microsoft Game Studios and I haven't heard a thing. We just recently did some staffing changes in managment in order to manage Rare. We would have to do another huge re-org in order to absorb Vivendi. I've heard nothing along those lines. If we bought Vivendi then my team would have to double in size and haven't been told to do that.
Doesn't Microsoft still produce the MS Office suite for Mac? And IE/OE? And a load of other products?
Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
Your history may be correct, but you could think a bit more before posting, too. Suppose Microsoft were the only provider of online services for OTC retail multi-player games. (And a purchase like this would trend in that direction.) Do you think they might charge for those services, then?
"And this is my boy, Sherman. Speak, Sherman." "Hello." "Good boy."
What I'm worried about in terms of Blizzard is the prospect of Microsoft trying to force them into releasing games before they're done, or perhaps cutting the fantastic support Blizzard gives it's games. I'm also worried that this may see an exclusive deal for Starcraft:Ghost, which I'm really looking forward to playing on my GameCube.
Looks can be deceiving. Or CAN they?
Aw man. That sucks. I'm not playing Diablo on an Xbox.
Actually, I've already played Diablo on the XBox. It was called "Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance," and it was fabulous. I highly recommend it.
The whole point-[move]-click-point-click-[fight] drill made much more sense, and was even more intuitive (if that's possible) with a controller than ever with a mouse/keyboard.
I thought those only protected you from aliens, not astroturfers.
"And this is my boy, Sherman. Speak, Sherman." "Hello." "Good boy."
for confining ANY game to just one platform. I'd love to play Metroid Prime but I am NOT buying a gamecube for it, I would PAY $$'s for a PC version, but alas they do not want my money. Halo is another that I won't be spending money on, any number of racing titles, what happened to cross platform standards ? Any game publisher MORONIC enough to limit the audience for their product to one platform deserves just what they get.. Let's face it, I am an avid gamer with a budget of about 200$ monthly, and I CAN'T FIND A GAME WORTH BUYING.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
*Sony or Nintendo buy game developer, make all its products exclusive to their respective console*
Slashdot Crowd: "Oh, bummer. Anyway....."
*Microsoft buys game developer. Makes all of its content exclusive to the Xbox*
Slashdot Crowd: "OMG! Evil conspiracy! Even though Sony and Nintendo have bought out multitudes of companies and made countless games exclusive (which is what makes a console survive in the first place) the very fabric of morality must be dissolving as we speak!"
Microsoft is only following the example set by their predecessors. Bitching at them more than you would bitch about another company doing the same thing is hypocritical and it severely weakens your argument.
It really, really sucks when a game you desperately want to play is only coming to a console you do not have. That is, however, the very nature of the business and exlcusive content is what makes or breaks a console.
I don't like business monoplies, I don't like to think that one company is attempting to control everything, but in this case I'm not worried.
Why?
There are two, very well-established and very skilled competitors who are trying to do the same thing. (though, Nintendo isn't so fierce). They are both using the same tactics, and they are both surviviing. I feel the pressure has made the industry better. There is now so much being put into getting the best hardware and the best games out there that the quality of the hardware/software lineup we are seeing now and will see in the future will be based on the struggle to not be left behind. A strong aversion to resting on one's laurels will pervade the console gaming industry.
So, when people talk about Microsoft being a big, bad guy in the console gaming world, I just chuckle, knowing that the next Sony and Nintendo consoles will be that much better than they would be otherwise. The two companies have no choice.
I for one, am glad the Xbox is here.
PS2 and GameCube fans should be, too.
Except when that game you wanted is picked up by a competing console. Even then, just grin and bear it. Your day will come....and then it will come again, and again and again.
Things in the console world are better than they've ever been.
You just have to open your eyes.
I wouldn't plan on seeing a Half Life 2 XBox exclusive. Since Vivendi only owns the publisher, I doubt that they can make the requirement that it goes XBox only. Second Valve should know that mods sold a huge number of the around 3 million cds that were purchased. That won't happen for a console. Lastly going XBox exclusive will mean they have to use XBox Live for online support. Now head to Valve and read about Steam. My guess is that Valve is looking to become their own publisher and possibly for others. Don't get me wrong, I love my PC, PS2 and XBox.
but I am still not going to buy an Xbox. For that matter I won't get a CE Pda, cell phone either.
Sure, it's childish, but I really don't care. It is not about how good the machine is, it is about principle.
Anyone that lets *one* company be the source for a large number of things in their life is a fool plain and simple.
Why do you think business likes more than one source? It's so that source does not screw them over when things get tough. That is what happens to us when we are stupid enough to limit our choices.
This applies to everyone, like it or not.
Someday in the future, you might use your MS PC to send e-mail through your MS ISP that contains a picture encoded with your MS codec to your friend who better be using a MS capable machine in order to see anything you wrote or produced.
Later that day you are interested in their thoughts, so you call on your MS phone on your way to work, where you use more MS products and services. You wind down at the end of the day with a game or two, maybe some pay per view media with your MS entertainment console.
Your bank is intergrated with your MS computer so the fat MS bill comes out at just the right time each month.
Now lets say most of us do this. Who is in control of our lives and choices? What incentive would MS have to act in our best interests?
Exactly none.
That's why I will not ever buy an X-box...
Blogging because I can...
Comment removed based on user account deletion
please, not Battle.NET!? =\
A more reliable rumor now circulating among game mags and their informers is that Half Life 2 is actually coming quite soon. The nature of the project has changed a bit, though.....
Apparently the President of Valve has spent A LOT of time in Redmond.
*coughXboxExclusiveTitle*cough*
If the intent of "Xbox Exclusive" remains "It will come out somewhere else later on, almost always the PC" I will have no problem with this. The PC community is needed for modding. The Xbox can be where people go to play the game, and its mods with a performance guarantee.
The Vivendi gamed divison includes Universal Interactive, Sierra, and Dynamix, and Blizzard. MS NEEDS to buy these divisions to show more support for its XB console. Rockstar slipped through MS's fingers, and this should NOT be allowed to happen again. Purchasing these companies would not only improve MS's PC content, but would provide great new, EXCLUSIVE content for the XB console. Crash Bandicoot could become an XB exclusive. Tribes for the PS2 could be cancelled and ported over for XB Live. Sierra's SWAT series could be put on XB as an alternative to the Red Storm games based on Tom Clancy materials. It would also be a major boon to have Warcraft and Diablo exclusive to PC and XB, and to have the World of Warcraft for XB Live. This is a chance to own some of the world's top studios and licenses, and should not be passed up. MS needs to take this opportunity, along with others that may arise, to put the hurt on Sony and Nintendo. Imagine if Sony purchased the Vivendi games division instead...would you really want the PS2 or PS3 to have an exclusive on World of Warcraft, regain their exclusive on Crash Bandicoot, and own the worlds of Diablo, Warcraft, Starcraft, Tribes, SWAT, and all the other titles of these companies? Perhaps even Blizzard and Sierra would be diverted primarily to console development, further hurting MS's power in the home PC arena. Buying Vivendi's games division is in the best interests of MS and XB owners around the world, to say nothing of PC gamers. Do it, MS...it's the smart move to make.
MS bought Bungie software. A mac game shop for a long time. Heck HALO was even demoed by Steve Jobs. The MS buys it and Bungie says, oh yeah, we'll still release Halo for the PC and Mac. MS put a stop that real quick.
I guess when you have billions in the bank and can't develop your own titles you buy the talent..
sigh....
I'm sure everyone here has seen how much revenue
the gaming industry boasts. It's phenomenal! If MS would
invest so much of its coffers into the X-Box even if it loses
money, then it stands to reason that they would absorb whatever
talent they could to grapple a hold in the market. Common
practice that we have seen over the years.
I'm not pro-MS and I'm not anti-MS but I do develop an opinion
while observing so many business purchases of MS over the
past few years. If they cannot beat the competition, they buy the
competition and brand it. It's not innovation they are offering
me, it's their ability to buy out competition and then sell it
to me again.
There was a URL posted several months back but I
cannot seem to find it. It listed several companies/corporations
and the subsidiaries they owned. Anyone mind posting
if they recall it?
My dad owns Blizzard AND Microsoft, and he says that they're coming out with Warstarcraft of Empires 5000. It'll be the best game, EVER.
Read The Wealth of Nations and get a bit better understanding of capitalism. In this particular instance, Microsoft isn't being any more evil than most other large corporations. So get to the back of the bus and sit down!
I hate liberals. If you are a liberal, do not reply.
SDL is the cross-platform answer to DirectX, and its only serious competition. Blizzard employs Sam Latinga, who originally developed SDL and whose fulltime job is to continue to develop it. I find it hard to believe that Microsoft will allow Blizzard to continue to develop SDL by employing Sam, unless they are subjected to a serious amount of scrutiny about it. It is obviously in Blizzard's interest as a game company to support SDL, but that will certainly change if Microsoft controls them, and given that Microsoft has understandably not shown the slightest fear of trustbusters lately, I expect them to act fairly promptly to rid themselves of this little thorn.
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.