Battle of the Mega Powers: EA Wants Take-Two

We’re already looking at the results of an Activision Vivendi union and now Electronic Arts is slowly working towards taking over Take-Two. Activision Blizzard is larger than that of EA but would the Take-Two buy-out grow EA into the number one publisher once again?

For gamers, it’s changing the map of the industry. We grew up with many of these seemingly big companies but their all clamoring together to make the next big mega-power. While they struggle for ultimate domination we, the gamers, are going to either benefit from the competition or become victims, or perhaps a little of both.

Let’s assume EA and Take-Two form one entity, similar to the the Destructicons forming “Devastator,” they can reign hell upon the earth and anyone under their mighty fist shall perish! That might be a bit of an exaggeration but it’s safe to assume they’ll wield mighty power, more than ever before and their epic foe will be Activision Blizzard and, perhaps, Ubisoft. In a battle for sales and consumer acceptance the companies will be willing to out do each other at every step with huge funds at their disposal.

As a consumer, competition is a great way to produce innovation, technological advancements and excitement in the industry. These giant development houses are only this large because we’ve given them our hard earned money in return for entertaining video game titles. World of Warcraft is a major player in sucking money from our wallets in a consistent, addictive, manner while Guitar Hero explores new possibilities in music and rhythm gaming and controller accessories.

Electronic Arts and Take-Two would have to combine and push ground breaking changes in all their game franchises to compete. Grand Theft Auto must top their already huge, or, perhaps, release smaller games on the DS. Their sports franchises will go unhindered into the night as the best and only solution to your football desires. John Riccitiello, EA’s CEO, has already acknowledge the lack of excitement and creativity from the EA game library and plans to change it by expanding new intellectual properties and, recently, added a few “small” purchases to their list including BioWare and Pandemic.

While Activision has found a fairly new niche with Guitar Hero we’re waiting to see if EA can respond with their casual games division or with some other secret projects to entangle both gamers and non-gamers. In many ways, this is a bright side to the mergers and acquisitions because we’re all getting something new and creative as talent and ownership changes hands.

Unfortunately, large companies like this can help destroy any chance of small uprisings of new studios by purchasing all the shelve space in retail outlets as part of their ongoing power struggle to be number one. They’ll be able to relax on franchises that have been flat-lining over the years, we may see no progress in the Madden series when Take-Two cannot compete at all in the space while under the wing of EA.

Indy developers will find it harder to compete with block buster titles because game engines are all being taken “in house” by the larger firms because they’ve got so many internal development studios they will need consistent proprietary game engines to hold their edge against their mega competitors. This leaves the indy companies with huge licensing expenses from a larger firm or going with a lighter less stable alternative. A few rise to the occassion like GarageGames to relieve some of the pressure, but how long before they’re bought up?

Perhaps smaller studios with great tools will rise to meet the demands of the Indy developers but they may fall under the mighty dollar if an EA or Activision Blizzard buys them out to “steal” the technology for themselves (or stop others from gaining unwanted advantages.) These large companies will fight tooth and nail so they can gloat positive trends to their share holders and make deals with the devil to push stock value through the roof.

These large studios will be looking to improve year-over-year profits and value to keep growing in the industry. It will not be about the game anymore, but about the dollar. Of course, the managment structures behind the companies will have to hold up and work well together to avoid becoming the next Sierra.

You can only be a mega power for so long before something changes your future. Randy Savage never saw it coming when Hulk Hogan ruined their alliance with three massive leg drops.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Episode 406: The Oops! EditionEpisode 406: The Oops! Edition

If you’re wondering what happened to Episode 405, it was recorded, but Jonah’s power supply self-destructed, and wasn’t available til Wednesday, and by then it was too late to post it. (It will be posted at some point in the near future.)

Instead, check out these week’s news:

  • Afro Samurai 2 removed from online stores, players get refunded, episodes 2 and 3 canceled
  • Activision apologizes for Nuk3town pre-order mix up
  • PlayStation 4 is getting PlayStation 2 emulation, Sony reveals
  • Electronic Arts doesn’t want to “nickel and dime” gamers with microtransactions

Question of the Week: Do you or have you pulled videogame all-nighters on weeknights?

Are Game Controllers Too Complicated?Are Game Controllers Too Complicated?

The same company that brought us the NES Advantage has proven the Wii control scheme isn’t as bad as critics speculated. The beauty of adding the “waggle” technology is limiting your button count to a reasonable level without overwhelming gamers.

We’re seeing casual gaming on the rise both in the press and in the public. Yet, each “next generation” console brings new features and functionality to the consoles, games and accessories. Since NES birthed the SNES we’ve seen button count increase on controllers.

Nintendo has usually been conservative on buttons, trying to work “shape” over sheer volume of buttons, barring the C button count on the N64 controller. Nintendo controllers change shape with each generation and they’ve evolved, not innovated, their way around with the Wii control scheme. Each function of the controller exists, on its own, in other products but nobody has built a fully functional controller in such a way for a game console until now.

Sony took pieces of this concept in their PS3 controller and its ability to detect “tilt.” Xbox 360 stuck with the beefy controller with lots of buttons and analog sticks. Not just a D-Pad but two analog sticks and a ton of buttons to press, some pressure sensitive as well. What of our next-generation console? Maybe a few new buttons?

Or, maybe a few new motions? Wii evolved the control scheme and Sony validated their decision, what’s next? Are the controllers just too damn complicated in today’s world? Or, perhaps limiting the buttons brings in more gamers, like Grandma and Grandpa, to play your console as well.

(more…)

Developer Wants License Keys For Console GamesDeveloper Wants License Keys For Console Games

UK developer David Braben from Frontier Developments believes smaller development studios are in the worse position when it comes to re-sale of “pre-owned” video games. Since a developer only gets their cut of the profits when a game is sold new, pre-owned titles allow gamers to play games without paying the developer for the effort.

This also hurts larger publishers, but they’re able to recover because of the sheer volume of games and game titles. One idea David had, was to code each game with a unique license key like a PC game that gamers must enter before playing. This would kill the ability to re-sell video games back to the market for others to buy at a cheaper price (translation: better value).

The future shows a higher degree of downloadable games, which cannot be re-used or sold back to the market, but for now, developers have to deal with pre-owned video games cutting into their profit. Presumably you could have a great game with smaller sales and a high degree of resale in the pre-owned market.

Problem with this take on development? Besides large scale video game sellers like GameStop making 80% profit margins on resold games (rather than a 10-15% on new), gamers want a way to make back some of their money on expensive titles. When you’re paying $60 for a game and you beat it in a week or two, you want to resell it so you can invest in a future title.

My theory… make games more affordable so we don’t feel gouged on the price. We may decide to hold on to it longer and tell our friends about it. A good game reference and a reasonable price will increase sales every time. Don’t try to solve pre-owned problems when the problem is the publisher and the industry making huge game prices.

(Thanks, Kotaku)