This is completly wrong, it's actually funny how wrong.

Naughty Dog, in business 17 years before sony bought them in 2001

Guerilla, founded 04, made an multiplat game before sony bought them in 2005

Evolution studios was making a pc game but they were interested in the wrc license sony owned so they went exclusive then  sony bought them in 07

Suckerpunch was founed at microsoft, their first game was a n64 game then sony funded sly in order to get the game exclusive then they were bought 2011

Media Molecule was started at Lionhead, they broke off from Lionhead and took the games they were working on and got funding from sony, they were bought in 2010

The only 2 successful sony started studios were Polyphony and Santa Monica.

LOL.  How often does this guy get banned?!  

There does seem to be a lot of thin skin on these forums.  I think you should more or less be banned for being CONSISTENTLY annoying.  Going out of your way to bash a system ALL THE TIME, etc.  But anyhow, what do I know.

Back on topic, interesting article.  I'm sure the art of managing game studio strategy is not an easy one.  They have their highs and low, etc. 

Can you give me a list of first party studios that you think are like this?

Well, you should be smart and think carefully before such a major investment. I think Microsoft looks back on Rare acquisition and can rightly feel over paid or didn't benefit like they hoped from it. There is still value in having high quality exclusives to drive a system, and I think how Sony handled Naughty Dog is great example.

Sony has a handful of development branches in America and Sony Santa Monica is at the top. You also forgot about Sony Japan and Team ICO. I said that Sonys companies that they've purchased have been second party before buying them. You have not proven me wrong.....at all. You're only bolstering my point whilst giving a history lesson.

Um, I did prove you wrong.

1. You said most successful, I listed the most successful studios, team bend, san diego, foster city, london, japan studio are not that successful, they may have cult hits, but not many big sellers.

2.You said sony made internal studios, 2nd party studios are not sony made.

3. MS is not 'learning from sony'. Sony turns a studio 2nd party then buys them if the partnership is successful. MS is building brand new studios from the ground up.

Once your banned, it's hard to not be noticed when you make any comment.  One thing for sure, the mods have been busy the last few weeks.  Best to stick to the topic and have a very middle ground opinion...

OT :  I still think that M$ isn't that interested in owning the developers, maybe just IP's.  We don't get to see the contrats they are signing for these newest games, but i would guess that a lot of them have an option for M$ to buy them.

Nope we just want to convince them with money. That is entirely different!

Would you kindly list them please?

I have a vague idea of who you might mention.

"because it knows that all too often, that's the death knell"