By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Dulfite said:
mjk45 said:

This purchase was clearly aimed at PSVR2 and since VR is something that MS clearly isn't involved in it is definitely not a preventative move.

Really? You don't think MS, a company that is constantly entering markets it hasn't been in, isn't looking into VR? If Sony is making profit off of it then Microsoft absolutely would make profit off of it and will no doubt get into it. What better way to enter it than having proven developers that have made VR games? I stand by that this was a preventative move.

MS have said they would invest on AR for X1 ever since before releasing X1X, but so far nothing.

Pemalite said:
Robert_Downey_Jr. said:

This Sony one and their past one are quite organic.  Usually Sony will buy studios that they published most of their games beforehand anyway so they were already exclusive and funded

A purchase, any purchase... Is inorganic growth.

Already owning a studio and growing it creatively and via investment is organic growth.

Sony and Microsoft are doing both, Sony more so as their wallets aren't as fat as Microsoft's.

I partially disagree because well the IPs already belonged to Sony, so it wouldn't be that much different than hiring everyone directly and giving a name to the studio versus buying the studio as whole, they would even save in some redundancies =p just would give a little more work to do.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."