Microsoft may purchase Electronic Arts

From 1UP.com

Scuttlebutt is going around Wall Street regarding a possible takeover of Electronic Arts at the hands of Microsoft. Talk of the potential buy has been dismissed as "unsubstantiated chatter" by Reuters, but rumors among traders have already served to drive up the stock of both companies. EA stock is up 5.24% to $19.36, while MS increased by 0.9% to $26. Some traders, at least, are banking on the possibility.

Whether purely the product of imagination or a legitimate piece of inside info, the rumor is plausible enough. The last year has seen a steady fall in videogame sales, the largest sales drop in nine years, leaving EA in a potentially weakened state. Such acquisitions have happened increasingly often, as in the case of "Activision Blizzard", and Zenimax/ID, and even EA's own attempts to acquire Take-Two.

Just how such a buy would change the face of the industry is difficult to comprehend. With EA dominating 20% game publishing market share and Microsoft 35% of hardware sales, the two combined would represent an absolute monolith. Or, at the very least, a chance to have a playable John Madden character for Halo 3: ODST's Firefight mode as DLC.

What do you guys think if this were to happen? Would Sony and Nintendo be utterly screwed? Would EAsoft take over gaming industry? I'd really like to hear your thoughts on this.

It's very interesting.

EA has been moving in the right direction with their games the past 2 years. I think Microsoft has not only noticed the market share but also the potential change in EA's prospects. EA has an awful financial history. If their products change for the better and they have the right to-market pipeline that Microsoft could supply, the scenario could compound to give Microsoft a great value.

It would be rough on Sony, for sure. I don't know how much EA develops for the Wii, if at all, but Sony would definitely get stung.

I personally wouldn't like to see Microsoft acquire EA. I've always believed that competition is the healthiest thing for any industry as it separates the wheat from the chaff, brings the cream to the top and is ultimately better for the consumer.

I don't blame Microsoft for making the acquisition if they are able to, but they need to realize that they might be hurting the video game business more than helping it by doing this.

My .02

I'm no business expert but this seems like it would hurt EA more than help them. Losing the sales they would make on both PS3 and Wii would take a lot of cash out of their pockets I would think.

I agree with Taiso's sentiment. If it were just a matter of EA putting out sports franchise games year after year, I could care less, but they release quite a large amount of software that isn't of that genre.

I really don't like the idea of exclusive software at all. It should all just be multi-platform. I realize that's not how the market works though...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by genjiglove

I'm no business expert but this seems like it would hurt EA more than help them. Losing the sales they would make on both PS3 and Wii would take a lot of cash out of their pockets I would think.

---

Depends on what MS is willing to pay. They have pretty fucking deep pockets (understatement).

That will monopolize a shit load of the mainstream market.

Peter Moore being bought out by his previous employer which had helped defeat his employer before that is hilarious.

It would create quite a monopoly, but it doesn't affect me because I don't buy many EA games (Except Rock Band)

Well I guess it would hurt everyone but MS. The consumer especially.

Oh no. what will people that own PS3s ever do with out Madden XIXIXXIIXIXXIXIXIXIXIMMMMCCCXIXIXIXI.

Eye. Roll.

edit: It is allowed to substitute "Madden" for "Any other Sports game ever" in this equation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cannonball

Well I guess it would hurt everyone but MS. The consumer especially.

---

That's basically the point of a move like that, choke everyone else out.

If that happens though, I bet you that the NFL license goes back out on the open market. Something tells me the NFL wouldn't like the idea of lower sales.

If this did occur, I don't think Microsoft would keep it to themselves. Multi-platform would continue and they'd make some money off the sales of games on platforms they don't own. It would give them a pretty big boost in marketplace presence.

take two has more upside potential if it's taken over by Microsoft and EA/activision blizard will be up against some serious competition. Microsoft will have the 2K sport series and a few other good title like GTA.

Anyone who advocates this idea is obviously interested in the death of the game's industry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GregN.

but it doesn't affect me because I don't buy many EA games (Except Rock Band)

---

This statement makes no sense. I don't buy EA games, except when I do... Okay then.

Anyways, I think this would be bad for the industry too. It'd also be something of a shame, since EA is actually making games I care about now, rather than the same endless parade of sequels and sports games they used to do. For all its flaws, Mirror's Edge is one of my favourite games this generation (so far). It'd be annoying if all the Madden shit plus the Mirror's Edge style stuff were all 360 exclusive.

But yeah. Bad for everybody except MS. That's the way it looks to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HeartlessNinny

This statement makes no sense. I don't buy EA games, except when I do... Okay then.

---

Selective reading much?

His statement was not in the absolute; he used the quantifier "many" EA games as opposed to "no" EA games.

Man, some people are QUICK to flame.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HeartlessNinny

For all its flaws, Mirror's Edge is one of my favourite games this generation (so far). It'd be annoying if all the Madden shit plus the Mirror's Edge style stuff were all 360 exclusive.

---

I feel the same about Dead Space, which isn't really 'flawed' but is obviously a RE 4 clone set in space with added in mechanics like the anti gravity and oxygen timer through suit upgrades.

EA offers more than sports titles, and not only would the current industry be hurt by their lineup going exclusive, but the future of the industry would be hurt. Think of all those developers that wouldn't be able to make games for non-MS platforms. Think of all that talent out there that would never be realized because they would be limited to one sandbox.

There is just too much in this industry to be lost by a move like this. Doesn't mean it won't happen. It would just not be good in any way, shape or form for the hobby as a whole.

ain't gonna happen.

It's a smart move by MS. Choke out a good portion of Sony's 3rd Party support.

I'm sure our anti-free market government will prevent it from happening though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DARK ANDY

Anyone who advocates this idea is obviously interested in the death of the game's industry.

---

Agreed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DARK ANDY

Selective reading much?

His statement was not in the absolute; he used the quantifier "many" EA games as opposed to "no" EA games.

Man, some people are QUICK to flame.

---

It wasn't a flame, more of a 'WTF.'

And you're conveniently reading selectively yourself. He said it won't affect him, then went on to describe why it would affect him by saying he does indeed buy EA games, such as Rock Band. So I stand by the statement.

I guess I sounded more snide than I meant to though. I'll rescind that part.

I love how EA is the paragon of a major video game publisher these days. :tickled:

It'll never happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KanYozakura

I love how EA is the paragon of a major video game publisher these days. :tickled:

It'll never happen.

---

What do you mean by 'these' days?

It was so in the 16-bit era forward. As easy as it is for longtime, Japan-gaming-centric folks to look down upon them anymore, EA didn't always churn out absolute shit year after year. Hell, even before 16-bit, they were a pretty big publisher, having cut their teeth on games like Larry Bird VS. Doctor J, The Pinball Construction Set and Skyfox for the C=64, along with countless other arcade ports for hardware of that era. Sure, they really hit the big-time with Madden, but they've been around for a long, loooooong friggin' time man.

EA owns a lot of great IPs and has many solid developers under their wing.

They also publish a shit ton of, well, shit.

This would be terrible, if true, unless the new EA Microsoft still released titles on all platforms.

Which probably wont be how it would go down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AncientFlounder

If this did occur, I don't think Microsoft would keep it to themselves. Multi-platform would continue and they'd make some money off the sales of games on platforms they don't own. It would give them a pretty big boost in marketplace presence.

---

Both a publicly traded companies. They can't keep it to themselves.

I think the "death of the games industry" comments are interesting. What did you guys think of the Disney/Marvel deal?

It'd be ironic that the company known for eating the young (EA) may be devoured by a bigger fish.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForeverSublime

Both a publicly traded companies. They can't keep it to themselves.

I think the "death of the games industry" comments are interesting. What did you guys think of the Disney/Marvel deal?

It'd be ironic that the company known for eating the young (EA) may be devoured by a bigger fish.

---

Well I don't think it would be the death of the industry or anything, but you can't argue that it wouldn't take a pretty hefty bite out of Sony's pie, which would be bad for the industry.

And the Marvel/Disney thing isn't analogous. Marvel's day-to-day operations will remain the same, but EA's sure as fuck won't if MS buys them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lagduf

EA owns a lot of great IPs and has many solid developers under their wing.

They also publish a shit ton of, well, shit.

This would be terrible, if true, unless the new EA Microsoft still released titles on all platforms.

Which probably wont be how it would go down.

---

Assuming the new EA doesn't release multiplatform games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lagduf

Assuming the new EA doesn't release multiplatform games.

---

Well, presumably, MS wants to buy EA so they can keep all that lucrative Madden-type goodness to themselves. Obviously it's too early to make any broad claims, but if I had to guess, I'd say that if the deal goes through the whole EA catalogue would become 360 exclusive.

I hope it doesn´t happens but if it does I doubt microsoft will make all EA games exclusives, they will be released first on the box and later on for other systems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Abasuto

It's a smart move by MS. Choke out a good portion of Sony's 3rd Party support.

I'm sure our anti-free market government will prevent it from happening though.

---

If MS were to buy them up and limit their releases to their own hardware, that's a step towards a monopolization. I'm all for a free market, but I'm not pro-monopoly. Competition breeds better products.

I wouldn't see any point in MS dropping a ton of bank, which would likely be quite a large amount, to buy up EA and then allow them to release software across all platforms. That just doesn't make sense because MS is in the game with their own console now.

You guys calling this a monopoly are using the term pretty loosely. Sony and other devs are more than free to put competing software out on the market. The only thing this would create a monopoly of is the nfl license. And I have to wonder how long that would last if this came to pass.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HeartlessNinny

Well I don't think it would be the death of the industry or anything, but you can't argue that it wouldn't take a pretty hefty bite out of Sony's pie, which would be bad for the industry.

And the Marvel/Disney thing isn't analogous. Marvel's day-to-day operations will remain the same, but EA's sure as fuck won't if MS buys them.

---

Perhaps, but if EA doesn't turn around (make a change) they won't be around, anyway. People have been treating EA as a "too big to fail" company.

Sony has other troubles. They've been cutting themselves for a long time in too many markets... and I remember a time when "sony is bad for the game industry" threads were flying back and forth.

It's not like EA's "day to day operations" have been the same over the past few years, anyway. Layoff/Absorb/Layoff City. So, don't give me that nonesense. :)

The longer I let your comments sink in the more I want to toss them aside.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loopz

What do you mean by 'these' days?

It was so in the 16-bit era forward. As easy as it is for longtime, Japan-gaming-centric folks to look down upon them anymore, EA didn't always churn out absolute shit year after year. Hell, even before 16-bit, they were a pretty big publisher, having cut their teeth on games like Larry Bird VS. Doctor J, The Pinball Construction Set and Skyfox for the C=64, along with countless other arcade ports for hardware of that era. Sure, they really hit the big-time with Madden, but they've been around for a long, loooooong friggin' time man.

---

Do you really have to try to one up me every time I post something serious?

Go make your damn arcade sticks. :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by subcons

If MS were to buy them up and limit their releases to their own hardware, that's a step towards a monopolization. I'm all for a free market, but I'm not pro-monopoly. Competition breeds better products.

I wouldn't see any point in MS dropping a ton of bank, which would likely be quite a large amount, to buy up EA and then allow them to release software across all platforms. That just doesn't make sense because MS is in the game with their own console now.

---

...as if someone having the soul rights to produce NFL video games would somehow limit the ability of developers to make "better football" video games. The rules of football are fairly set in stone.*

Historically, "better" football games were usually made when when they weren't based on the NFL. The NFL brand limits the quality of the product.

*Legal question: Are the "rules of football" as I put it actually "NFL rules" (as the CFL has different rules... dunno about World League)? Or are those rules "rules of a game" in general a la "the rules of Chess".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KanYozakura

Do you really have to try to one up me every time I post something serious?

Go make your damn arcade sticks. :rolleyes:

---

lmao, Wow.

Loopz was essentially telling you that your subtle insinuation that EA is not a 'legit' game publisher is incorrect. Quality of products aside, EA has put their time and effort into maneuvering themselves into the position they are today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KanYozakura

Do you really have to try to one up me every time I post something serious?

Go make your damn arcade sticks. :rolleyes:

---

It's not my fault you're a dense motherfucker who spouts off with NO sense of history of the industry at all. I wouldn't have a problem with you if you didn't endlessly troll this joint with your misinformed, 'gut-instinct' 4-chantastic-internet-meme three-second attention span bullshit.

If you get it wrong, prepare to be called on it. That is the essence of NG.com. If you're gonna swing your little stick and try to make noise, be informed. That's it. I have no problem with passion about this stuff, but I have every issue possible with flagrant, willful stupidity.

Heed my sig if you're gonna be a little bitch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DARK ANDY

lmao, Wow.

Loopz was essentially telling you that your subtle insinuation that EA is not a 'legit' game publisher is incorrect. Quality of products aside, EA has put their time and effort into maneuvering themselves into the position they are today.

---

I never made a "sublte insinuation" that EA wasn't legit.

I am well aware of EA's stellar track record pre-2000 but 5-6 years ago EA was viewed as the gaming industry's Big Brother and the example of a company too big for its pants. Especially after the Madden buyout people were up in arms about the evils of EA while other big publishers hardly got any press.

Now the situation has flipped: ActiBlizz is the big bad wolf while EA is finally getting its act together by putting quality above quantity/profits.

Seriously, what non-sports titles of note did EA publish/develop during last gen? Def Jam?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loopz

It's not my fault you're a dense motherfucker who spouts off with NO sense of history of the industry at all. I wouldn't have a problem with you if you didn't endlessly troll this joint with your misinformed, 'gut-instinct' 4-chantastic-internet-meme three-second attention span bullshit.

If you get it wrong, prepare to be called on it. That is the essence of NG.com. If you're gonna swing your little stick and try to make noise, be informed. That's it. I have no problem with passion about this stuff, but I have every issue possible with flagrant, willful stupidity.

Heed my sig if you're gonna be a little bitch.

---

Hold the fuck up.

You accuse me of being dense by not pointing out the great early EA titles but conveniently skip over the 98-06 period of soulless bullshit?

EA as a whole has had a remarkable shift in quality and diversity over the past 5 years. Like I said in the previous post, they went from being one of the most hated/flamed big publishers to one of the higher quality ones within this generation. That's what my original comment was insinuating, and I didn't need a 500 word text wall to explain it.

I know this is a classic gaming board but goddamn, get with the times.

Fuck history and Fuck EA. EA makes me want to kill Buddhist monks and lemurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KanYozakura

Hold the fuck up.

You accuse me of being dense by not pointing out the great early EA titles but conveniently skip over the 98-06 period of soulless bullshit?

EA as a whole has had a remarkable shift in quality and diversity over the past 5 years. Like I said in the previous post, they went from being one of the most hated/flamed big publishers to one of the higher quality ones within this generation. That's what my original comment was insinuating, and I didn't need a 500 word text wall to explain it.

I know this is a classic gaming board but goddamn, get with the times.

---

I don't get this arbitrary, magical '98-'06 timeline you're getting at. Madden comes out every fucking year, and every year, every magazine on Earth is too chicken shit to give it what it really deserves.

Actually, EA (via EA Canada/BIG) did have a good thing going in the early part of this decade with both SSX (not really a sports title per se, more like Wipeout on a snowboard) and NBA Street (yes, a sports game, but with much more of an arcade flair). Both series got mostly good reviews until they sort of hit the wall the last few years.

So...you've either got a weird idea rooted around some article you read, or you're just sorta talking out of your ass at this point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loopz

I don't get this arbitrary, magical '98-'06 timeline you're getting at. Madden comes out every fucking year, and every year, every magazine on Earth is too chicken shit to give it what it really deserves.

Actually, EA (via EA Canada/BIG) did have a good thing going in the early part of this decade with both SSX (not really a sports title per se, more like Wipeout on a snowboard) and NBA Street (yes, a sports game, but with much more of an arcade flair). Both series got mostly good reviews until they sort of hit the wall the last few years.

So...you've either got a weird idea rooted around some article you read, or you're just sorta talking out of your ass at this point.

---

Nah, EA started to be shit after the 16 bit era died.

Most of the good PS1/Sat/N64 games were either PC ports or 3D reimaginings of 16 bit games.

16 bit Madden was great and the 3D versions were jaw-dropping for the time but come the PS2 era it started to falter out.

Outside of Need for Speed and Def Jam almost every goddamn thing out of EA was sports/licensed. I'll give you SSX (never played it but heard good things) but seriously, did EA release anything of note? The LotR games were decent but not standout and they did fuckall with the Marvel license outside of that Nemesis game.

Here's the cliff notes version of the shit they pulled in case you don't remember.

Fuckin Fuck EA. Fuck John Madden.

I call BS on this. The FTC would NEVER let it happen, and Sony would probably counteroffer. If it was real, there would be a wave of fear washing over every part of the video game industry, and it isn't happening.

This is really much ado about nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForeverSublime

*Legal question: Are the "rules of football" as I put it actually "NFL rules" (as the CFL has different rules... dunno about World League)? Or are those rules "rules of a game" in general a la "the rules of Chess".

---

It has nothing to do with accurate rules and everything to do with branding. John Q. Asshole customer wants to play with real pro players in real stadiums with real stats. Having the NFL license is the only way that can happen.

Edit: Also, this isn't going to happen. Check this update. Thread over.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForeverSublime

Perhaps, but if EA doesn't turn around (make a change) they won't be around, anyway. People have been treating EA as a "too big to fail" company.

Sony has other troubles. They've been cutting themselves for a long time in too many markets... and I remember a time when "sony is bad for the game industry" threads were flying back and forth.

It's not like EA's "day to day operations" have been the same over the past few years, anyway. Layoff/Absorb/Layoff City. So, don't give me that nonesense. :)

The longer I let your comments sink in the more I want to toss them aside.

---

None of what you say is false or anything, but I don't see how that changes the fact that EA's operations would change a lot under MS ownership. I would be very, very surprised if they just kept right on making games the same way they are now.

And sure, Sony has dropped the ball a bit, but they're on the rebound now, and this wouldn't be doing them any favours. That's pretty much all there is to it.

I don't have a 360 and I don't play EA games

In other words, I don't give a shit, bitch

did everyone just totally miss when activision overtook ea?

ea is no longer the evil corporate overlords pumping out their yearly sports games. activision is the new evil empire to hate on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DARK ANDY

Anyone who advocates this idea is obviously interested in the death of the game's industry.

---

lol really?

if ea's games become exclusive to ms all that means is better competition coming from other 3rd parties for sales on sony/nintendo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Murray

Edit: Also, this isn't going to happen. Check this update. Thread over.

---

...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HeartlessNinny

None of what you say is false or anything, but I don't see how that changes the fact that EA's operations would change a lot under MS ownership. I would be very, very surprised if they just kept right on making games the same way they are now.

And sure, Sony has dropped the ball a bit, but they're on the rebound now, and this wouldn't be doing them any favours. That's pretty much all there is to it.

---

On the contrary. Microsoft *wants* EA to continue what they're doing now that EA has figured out what they should have been doing years ago. The change they've gone through over the past 2 years is exactly why Microsoft is interested... because they can scoop them up before others take notice and EA increases their realized value. Similarly again to the Marvel/Disney deal: Marvel has crazy profitability coming up over the next 4 years when they were going to make money on their own movie productions (instead of having other studios make movies on their IP). Disney saw the value in that and wants Marvel to keep doing exactly what they're doing - but buy them up before they do it.

Whether or not the acquisition would do anyone else "any favours" doesn't matter... If EA decides they just want to dissolve the company the SEC isn't going to step in and say, "Hey, Sony needs you!". It would suck for a lot more people than Sony. That's the truth with any buyout.

Curious: If this were Sony buying EA what would people be saying?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Murray

It has nothing to do with accurate rules and everything to do with branding. John Q. Asshole customer wants to play with real pro players in real stadiums with real stats. Having the NFL license is the only way that can happen.

---

John Q. Obvious. ;)

My question was a legitimate legal question. It had nothing to do with business.

God I hate EA, the Japanese developers were always better at making sports video games anyway..

It would only be smart if Sony will buy Sega as a counter move. :)