By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Microsoft might acquire IO Interactive

WoodenPints on 24 November 2018
fatslob-:O said:
twintail said:

My understanding is that Hitman 2 is performing badly in sales. Probably they have no choice.

 

Seems like MS is buying a bunch of failing companies (who make good games).

Good for MS and the company. But do they have the management in place for so many teams so quickly?

Well on the bright side if they do acquire IO they can at least keep the series alive and seriously improve the engine technology along with it ... 

IO Interactive don't own the Hitman IP so if Microsoft or another big publisher did buy them they would loose their exclusive rights to it as Square Enix own the Hitman IP. If anyone were to acquire IOI it would be purely on the basis of the development teams quality and efficiency that they can pump out good games.



Around the Network
Barkley on 24 November 2018
WoodenPints said:
fatslob-:O said:

Well on the bright side if they do acquire IO they can at least keep the series alive and seriously improve the engine technology along with it ... 

IO Interactive don't own the Hitman IP so if Microsoft or another big publisher did buy them they would loose their exclusive rights to it as Square Enix own the Hitman IP. If anyone were to acquire IOI it would be purely on the basis of the development teams quality and efficiency that they can pump out good games.

"IO Interactive has revealed it has officially gone independent and, better still, will "keep all of the rights to the Hitman IP.""

Hitman 2 already has no involvement with Square. It's published by Warner Bros.



COKTOE on 24 November 2018
WoodenPints said:
fatslob-:O said:

Well on the bright side if they do acquire IO they can at least keep the series alive and seriously improve the engine technology along with it ... 

IO Interactive don't own the Hitman IP so if Microsoft or another big publisher did buy them they would loose their exclusive rights to it as Square Enix own the Hitman IP. If anyone were to acquire IOI it would be purely on the basis of the development teams quality and efficiency that they can pump out good games.

Whaaa? Really? That's.....surprising.



- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."

Conina on 24 November 2018
fatslob-:O said:
Conina said:

Brian Fargo wasn't a big fan of ubiquitous publishers either in the last decade and was proud of inXile's independence... just look at his Kickstarter promotion videos or FIG. That didn't stop inXile to join Microsft Studios.

As for what happened with inXile and Brian Fargo, that was a decade ago like you pointed out.

No, it wasn't "a decade ago". It was his opinion all the last ten years and it didn't change a decade ago.

Here is the Kickstarter video from 2015:


View on YouTube



Kerotan on 24 November 2018
WoodenPints said:
fatslob-:O said:

Well on the bright side if they do acquire IO they can at least keep the series alive and seriously improve the engine technology along with it ... 

IO Interactive don't own the Hitman IP so if Microsoft or another big publisher did buy them they would loose their exclusive rights to it as Square Enix own the Hitman IP. If anyone were to acquire IOI it would be purely on the basis of the development teams quality and efficiency that they can pump out good games.

 

Barkley said:
WoodenPints said:

IO Interactive don't own the Hitman IP so if Microsoft or another big publisher did buy them they would loose their exclusive rights to it as Square Enix own the Hitman IP. If anyone were to acquire IOI it would be purely on the basis of the development teams quality and efficiency that they can pump out good games.

"IO Interactive has revealed it has officially gone independent and, better still, will "keep all of the rights to the Hitman IP.""

Hitman 2 already has no involvement with Square. It's published by Warner Bros.

So which is true? 



Around the Network
Skeeuk on 24 November 2018

1st party support is now nullified because all games are on PC



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

fatslob-:O on 24 November 2018
Conina said:

No, it wasn't "a decade ago". It was his opinion all the last ten years and it didn't change a decade ago.

Here is the Kickstarter video from 2015:


View on YouTube

Huh, so how do you suppose what message I am to convey from the video you just posted ? I'm not exactly getting into how the video demonstrates Brian Fargo's value on studio independence or even arguments outlined for it. All I got was "kickstarter was good to avoid other forms of monetization and to sustain the old business model" ... 

I maintain the stance that Brian Fargo's thoughts regarding the importance of studio independence over the years remain unknown ... 

Kerotan said:

So which is true? 

What Barkley said is the truth as Square Enix does not own the IP anymore but as for the previous entries involving Square Enix they still potentially monetize those under possible royalty agreements as they did fund the previous games in the franchise ... 



VAMatt on 24 November 2018
fatslob-:O said:
Hmm, considering that management pushed to gain the studio's independence last year I doubt that the thought of an acquisition would cross their minds ...

It's a business.  If the offer is good, it doesn't much matter that they prefer being independent.  Businesses are run, in large part, by the numbers (as they should be). 

Certainly, morale is considered when making a deal based on numbers. But, good numbers can do a lot to fix morale, and big enough numbers can push morale down the priority list.



LudicrousSpeed on 24 November 2018

I've been excited about most of the other ones, especially inXile and Obsidian. This gets a meh though.



Conina on 24 November 2018
fatslob-:O said:

Huh, so how do you suppose what message I am to convey from the video you just posted ? I'm not exactly getting into how the video demonstrates Brian Fargo's value on studio independence or even arguments outlined for it. All I got was "kickstarter was good to avoid other forms of monetization and to sustain the old business model" ... 

I maintain the stance that Brian Fargo's thoughts regarding the importance of studio independence over the years remain unknown ... 

 

And yet you suggest that that the thought of an acquisition didn't cross the minds of IO's management.

Their thoughts regarding the importance of studio independence aren't any clearer or better known, are they?