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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Should Sony acquire another less expensive developer? Since Square is really in good terms with Sony?

EricHiggin said:
ironmanDX said:

That's as bad a take as the Sony should sell thread. 

Such little faith in Sony 1st party games. 

You don't think Sony would get a cut of all those subs? All those micro transactions? While also selling their games on top. 

They'd almost consolidate the... For the lack of a better word... "hardcore" console gamers on their system. 

Who could oppose them after that? No one. 

Only if SNY was totally backed into a corner, which they certainly aren't yet.

The problem is profits, and XB wins that game big time if GP ends up on PS consoles.

If that wasn't the case, SNY would've allowed it already. Like cross play.

That would come. Sony are already making money with every PS5 disc edition sold.

Xbox hardware would be squeezed out and made redundant. Sony would control the store.



Around the Network
ironmanDX said:
EricHiggin said:

Only if SNY was totally backed into a corner, which they certainly aren't yet.

The problem is profits, and XB wins that game big time if GP ends up on PS consoles.

If that wasn't the case, SNY would've allowed it already. Like cross play.

That would come. Sony are already making money with every PS5 disc edition sold.

Xbox hardware would be squeezed out and made redundant. Sony would control the store.

So if making money on hardware is so great, then why would MS disregard hardware?

MS hates the 'most' profitable portions of gaming? MS hates control?

The only GP on PS5 strategy that makes any sense right now for SNY, though sleezy, would be to agree before MS makes any more acquisitions, which includes having MS stop selling XB hardware anymore. Then do what some of the tech companies have done to cripple their competitors and say, 'XB is bad because reasons, so we're kicking/banning GP off PS5 entirely'.



EricHiggin said:
ironmanDX said:

That would come. Sony are already making money with every PS5 disc edition sold.

Xbox hardware would be squeezed out and made redundant. Sony would control the store.

So if making money on hardware is so great, then why would MS disregard hardware?

MS hates the 'most' profitable portions of gaming? MS hates control?

The only GP on PS5 strategy that makes any sense right now for SNY, though sleezy, would be to agree before MS makes any more acquisitions, which includes having MS stop selling XB hardware anymore. Then do what some of the tech companies have done to cripple their competitors and say, 'XB is bad because reasons, so we're kicking/banning GP off PS5 entirely'.

Lol wut. 

I didn't say it was near the most... I said they're making money on systems already.

What would be the point of Sony asking that? Having all 1st party xbox games on Gamepass day one would make the system redundant. 

Lmao. 



ironmanDX said:
EricHiggin said:

So if making money on hardware is so great, then why would MS disregard hardware?

MS hates the 'most' profitable portions of gaming? MS hates control?

The only GP on PS5 strategy that makes any sense right now for SNY, though sleezy, would be to agree before MS makes any more acquisitions, which includes having MS stop selling XB hardware anymore. Then do what some of the tech companies have done to cripple their competitors and say, 'XB is bad because reasons, so we're kicking/banning GP off PS5 entirely'.

Lol wut. 

I didn't say it was near the most... I said they're making money on systems already.

What would be the point of Sony asking that? Having all 1st party xbox games on Gamepass day one would make the system redundant. 

Lmao. 

What would be the point in MS asking SNY to put GP on PS5?

LMAO.



EricHiggin said:
ironmanDX said:

Lol wut. 

I didn't say it was near the most... I said they're making money on systems already.

What would be the point of Sony asking that? Having all 1st party xbox games on Gamepass day one would make the system redundant. 

Lmao. 

What would be the point in MS asking SNY to put GP on PS5?

LMAO.

To PLAY ANYWHERE

It's already been offered. Sony DECLINED. 



Around the Network
ironmanDX said:
EricHiggin said:

What would be the point in MS asking SNY to put GP on PS5?

LMAO.

To PLAY ANYWHERE

It's already been offered. Sony DECLINED. 

They sure did. They did indeed.

Seems like they're not the only ones either.

Access Denied.



BasilZero said:
Mandalore76 said:

Weren't the Arc The Lad games developed by G-Craft, who is now a member of SquareEnix's development division?  And weren't the Dark Cloud games developed by Level 5?  Pretty sure Sony only published those games, but don't hold any IP ownership over them.

Pretty sure Arc the Lad and Dark Cloud are still owned by Sony.

twintail said:
BasilZero said:

Pretty sure Arc the Lad and Dark Cloud are still owned by Sony.

They most definitely do 

I stand corrected.  The wiki wasn't explicit on the ownership, just mentioning exclusivity to PlayStation and that Sony was the publisher.  The release on WonderSwan Color was throwing me off, but I've seen now that it's clearly marked on the WonderSwan case "Arc The Lad is a trademark of Sony Computer Entertainment".



EricHiggin said:

Well the biggest talking point about this acquisition overall seems to be COD and whether or not it'll end up exclusive.

Whether it does or not, if you're EA and Dice right now, with the Battlefield franchise, you'd best be looking to PS for a partnership going forward. If you're PS, you'd best be taking advantage of that, or more.

Now assuming there wouldn't be a buyout or merger between EA and SNY, who knows, is there any chance PS could simply acquire Dice and Battlefield? Would EA let them go?

The Battlefield franchise has not been stellar over the last few games, especially the most recent, so now could be a good time for a business deal. PS could really use something to counter COD, and if they had Dice in house, they could probably help stabilize and grow Battlefield to much better compete with COD.

This way SNY doesn't necessarily need all of EA at $40 billion+, though it's not like that would hurt.

(Owning EA though, would allow SNY to potentially force MS to keep more franchises coming to the PS platform, otherwise everything becomes exclusive.)

Actually just read elsewhere a few comments with a similar idea, but grab Respawn and the Titanfall franchise instead.

I always felt Titanfall was more COD like, besides the Mechs.

Since EA don't seem to care about Titanfall anymore, that could be something they could fairly easily let go. 



JRPGfan said:
freebs2 said:

Of course I'm against further consolidation but let's entertain the idea.

Japan companies

- Square Enix ($6 billion) doesn't make much sense imo, Sony already has thier full support and "snatching it" wouldn't hurt Xbox in the slightest (Final Fantasy is not what it used to be in the 90s). I mean it could be viable maybe but they would still spend a lot of money and gain very little advantage in return.

Square has so many great IP, and make fantastic RPGs.

FF14, is still the best MMO on the market to this day (~37m players/subs, and ~3,5-4m daily players).
FF15 sold over 10m copies, Also FF16 is right around the corner.
FF7 remake, is in parts....
That will continue to build up, as it get more releases.
Also once its all said and done, I'm sure they ll do a bundle with all the parts in 1 package. It's gonna end up big to (10m+ (for all parts likely)).

There are worse things to spend that much $ on, if your looking to buy someone big.

"Final Fantasy is not what it used to be in the 90s"

When was Square at their heights?
Back when ff7 was out?
FF7 only ended up selling like 13,5 ? million or so (2021).

Overall I think Final Fantasy is selling as much (or more) than it ever was.
Even if perphaps it feels like its impact isnt as large, as it once was.
From a sales perspective, I think even with inflation factored in, they are makeing more now, than ever (both in $ and sales).

Perhaps I've underestimated how big FF14 is.

But I would sill say no, Final Fantasy is not what it was in the 90s. It's true newer games are moving more units, on 3 different platforms, with much larger development and marketing investments, in a market that is several times larger. It's "worth" more than in the 90s but it doesn't have nearly the same "weight".



I don’t understand why many want Sony to buy Square. Because it would be easy perhaps? The problem is that the vast majority of Square’s game sales are already PlayStation players, and Sony already has extensive exclusivity deals in place. Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free, as they say.


Wouldn’t it be wiser to go after an entity with more broad based appeal, that would stop casual user attrition as opposed to just servicing the most hardcore Sony fans?