As we've mentioned, Xbox boss and Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer appeared in an interview with Bloomberg earlier this week, and he was asked during the discussion about how the Activision Blizzard deal came together.
Interestingly, Spencer didn't point to Call of Duty or any other Activision Blizzard IP in response, but instead explained that the internal discussions began around ActiBlizz's capability in regards to mobile and PC gaming.
"When we were thinking about, on that idea of, 'what are we capable of doing today, and where do we need to go', the biggest gaming platform on the planet is mobile phones..."
"We really started the discussions, internally at least, around the capability they had on mobile and then PC with Blizzard. Those are the two things that were really driving our interest."
Talking about mobile a bit more, Spencer mentioned that Microsoft doesn't currently use it as a "native platform" for gaming, and hinted that the company looked at Activision Blizzard as a way to add "teams that could be a good fit" for such projects — after all, the ActiBlizz deal comes with the Candy Crush IP included, for example.
This isn't the first time Spencer has alluded to the importance of mobile as part of this acquisition, stating back in January that he was looking forward to learning from the teams at Candy Crush developer King:
"...mobile is the biggest category of gaming, and it’s an area where we have not had a major presence before. This transaction adds one of the most successful mobile publishers to Microsoft Gaming, and I’m personally looking forward to learning from the innovative teams at King."
What do you make of Spencer's comments on the acquisition here? Let us know down below.
[source youtube.com]
Comments 18
He forgot to say call of duty.....
If the deal goes through hopefully they can improve overwatch 2 and bring back its glory days before blizzard abandoned it and released the bare bones overwatch 2 beta. This game should be huge and will be xbox's way to get into the e-sports scene.
Yep he went straight to the mobile phones… everybody focusing on Activision and not as much on what they’re getting out of Blizzard. Diablo alone is going to earn them billions on the mobile space.
Activision Blizz do nothing I’m really interested in, Phil just waffling on about mobile gaming makes this acquisition even less interesting to me. No denying the money this will bring MS though.
Pretty logical. Phil has said that their goal is to reach the 3 billion gamers. Since they don't have a strong presence in the mobile and pc market, ABK i a good deal. Blizzard always has been mainly a pc developer and King with Candy Crush is hugely successful on mobile. Besides those 2 markets they want to get a bigger share in, they also get Call of Duty, and whether people like it or not is one of the best selling game series out there.
It was a smart decision. The Gamepass app is pretty rough around the edges and will need to be improved as Xbox looks for a larger presence in the pc market. I'm hoping they take not only Activision's games over but they utilize the experience of the Battle.net team to make the Xbox app better.
Phil the mouth piece at it again.
Go manage the studios you have and produce a top end AAA game for my series x. One real AAA in two years FH5. Zero for 2022.
You are a joke mate and a corporate mouth piece that’s all.
Read this Phil.
“ Halo Infinite isn't in the Top 10 of most-played Steam games. In fact, at a little more than six months old - and its fan-favourite multiplayer component entirely free-to-play and available on Steam - Halo Infinite doesn't even breach the top 50 games that boast the highest concurrent player numbers. Or the top 100.”
Studio and so called AAA game management a joke. That gang of Phil’s couldn’t manage a bunk up in a brothel.
Yeah, I'm sure the biggest shooter on the market has NOTHING to do with it. Mobile games obviously.
Glad Phil Spencer is thinking of us console gamers with this drive for mobile games and the metaverse and lack of desire for exclusive content.
@Dezzy70 vote with your feet then mate?
Phil says this but a big selling point for Windows Phone 7 back in the day was Xbox integration and having achievements in mobile ports of titles like Hexic (which was REALLY GOOD)
Howabout bringing that back for a start? I still play Halo Spartan Strike on my iPhone; why not redo those titles as a start?
@Bruvas
I have all three consoles.
And yes I do pay £70 for a game but the ones only I really like HFW, R and clank, GOWR.
I would pay £70 for a series console game like halo Infinite had the open world quality been of HFW standard or ACV standard but of course in a multi biome Zeta Halo world.
@Bruvas Phil has been in his position for a long time now and this year alone Xbox hasn’t had one AAA exclusive. There’s no excuse for that. He’s always out and about on Twitter saying he’s looking forward to God of War or talking about acquisitions to the press which is all well and good but imo he needs to start focusing on Xbox and what his studios are doing more. Some of them like 343 have been horribly mismanaged and things need to improve.
Backs up what I thought initially. Many were ignoring the King part of the ABK acquisition. Candy Crush, CoD mobile and more are so huge yet treated like red headed cousins ten times removed. I get it, we’re enthusiast console gamers here and less likely to play on mobile but it’s the largest slice of the industry pie and a part Microsoft are missing. Logical they want in on that.
@Kaloudz
"Buying talent doesn't make you talented."
Way too many people using this nonsense sentence. What is that even supposed to mean? Does it mean Phil needs to get talented (whatever that means) in order for Xbox to get more/better games? Or does it mean Xbox has to invest into their already owned studios, to create talent?
The first version makes no sense whatsoever, the second means they would buy talent ... There is no difference between spending money to build up people or spending money to get already built-up people. Of course companies buy talent. Every single company does that, when given the chance. That's how they innovate.
@Kaloudz
I didn't mention anything about my happiness regarding this topic. I just wrote, that I don't understand what this statement is supposed to mean. It's only now that you are starting to make a little bit sense. The problem however is, that the word "talent" is used in an ambivalent way by you. First you fire at talent as in 'creativity', next you swing around and aim at management when you are asked to elaborate. Two completely different things ...
Yes, they have yet to deliver. One can agree on this. Buying talent however isn't really criticism-deserving. You surely see the difference there.
Apart from this, what do you want MS to do, really? Do you want them to pressure their studios into delivering early? We all know how that usually goes, right? There are more than enough people, nowadays, demanding that A) developers take more time, to deliver a good product and B) that Microsoft (given their track record in the past, as "the bad guys") keep their gnarly fingers out of everything. Now, however, people like you come around the corner and criticise MS and their studios for doing exactly what was wished for ... It's frustrating to say the least.
It takes time, but you can already see what is in the pipeline. Thing is, you would have to wait for it in any other scenario as well. So, what gives?
@Kaloudz
I think, people who proactively reason with the term 'opinion' are weird. I really don't care about whether you hold up opinions or not. Matter of fact is, that I think you're wrong - freedom of opinion or not - and that I wouldn't keep quiet even if you said I wasn't entitled to my opinion. So, again, hollow words.
Developing games takes time. 'Fast' is the enemy of quality, as proven time and again. There is no amount of managment that could change this fact. Currently MS is doing the right thing. The Game Pass offers enough games to bridge the gap. If you're not satisfied, over there is Nintendo and Sony, or use a PC to do whatever. You won't be any happier, because some people simply will always find things to complain about, no matter what companies do. It's like a hobby.
@Kaloudz
Thought you wanted to bow out of this conversation. But I see you deleted that statement afterwards …
You don’t have to pretend anything. Fact of the matter is still, that you would have to wait for the games in the pipeline even if they were not owned by MS. You still fail to make a coherent point. On the one hand, you criticize MS for not popping out games left and right, on the other hand you claim to agree with me that these things take time. Instead of needlessly insisting on your right to voice your opinion, like every conspiracy theorist would, you could try and answer my question.
So, let me ask you again. What exactly is it you want from MS? Overruling and influencing creativity or hands off like so many want? With the former you would find new points to criticize, because you say fast is the enemy of quality - with the latter you would have to wait and bridge the gaps like an adult person. What will it be?
Tap here to load 18 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...