The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
As part of the merger plan, Blizzard will invest $2bn in the new company, while Activision is putting up $1bn.
The merged business will be called Activision Blizzard and its chief executive will be Activision's current CEO Bobby Kotick. Vivendi will be the biggest shareholder in the group.
Jean-Bernard Levy, Vivendi chief executive, said: "This alliance is a major strategic step for Vivendi and is another illustration of our drive to extend our presence in the entertainment sector. By combining Vivendi's games business with Activision, we are creating a worldwide leader in a high-growth industry."
The two firms are hoping that their different strengths will combine to form a business which is powerful on every gaming platform and in every territory. Blizzard is strong in Asia, where its Starcraft series has proved hugely popular. Starcraft, a strategy game first released in 1998, is played by millions of South Koreans in gaming cyber-cafes, and by professional gamers on television.
Activision has developed a presence on all three new generation game consoles - Microsoft's Xbox 360, Sony's PlayStation 3 and the Nintendo Wii - with franchises such as Spider-Man and X-Men. The games software industry has been through turbulent years, with companies changing ownership and going in and out of business in rapid succession.
Activision was formed in 1979 and went through bankruptcy and a series of alliances and mergers before becoming successful. Blizzard had been through a number of owners before ending up in the hands of Vivendi in 1998.
The biggest player in the industry remains Electronic Arts, the firm behind such titles as the Sims and the Fifa football games. But the emergence of a powerful well-funded rival in Activision Blizzard could trigger a new upheaval in the industry, with smaller players being gobbled up by the giants.
So Blizzard, being that they are rolling in €€€€€££$$$$$ decides to join a company that does not have the same money making machine? And they hand CEO over to them as well? And invest more.
So Blizzard, being that they are rolling in €€€€€££$$$$$ decides to join a company that does not have the same money making machine? And they hand CEO over to them as well? And invest more.
So Blizzard, being that they are rolling in €€€€€££$$$$$ decides to join a company that does not have the same money making machine? And they hand CEO over to them as well? And invest more.
Do you even know how much money Activision make?
Yes. But still. Even disregarding WoW, the Blizzard brand is undoubtedly one of the best brands to throw onto something. I'm not sure why they'd dilute it. Except moar money of course.
So Blizzard, being that they are rolling in €€€€€££$$$$$ decides to join a company that does not have the same money making machine? And they hand CEO over to them as well? And invest more.
Do you even know how much money Activision make?
Yes. But still. Even disregarding WoW, the Blizzard brand is undoubtedly one of the best brands to throw onto something. I'm not sure why they'd dilute it. Except moar money of course.
I'd hardly say it was being diluted. Short of blizzard flat out buying Activision (they wouldnt and most certainly couldnt) the name Activision Blizzard is about as high profile as they could have asked for.
Especially considering Vivendi owns Blizzard and isnt even in the new name at all.
So Blizzard, being that they are rolling in €€€€€££$$$$$ decides to join a company that does not have the same money making machine? And they hand CEO over to them as well? And invest more.
Do you even know how much money Activision make?
Yes. But still. Even disregarding WoW, the Blizzard brand is undoubtedly one of the best brands to throw onto something. I'm not sure why they'd dilute it. Except moar money of course.
I'd hardly say it was being diluted. Short of blizzard flat out buying Activision (they wouldnt and most certainly couldnt) the name Activision Blizzard is about as high profile as they could have asked for.
Especially considering Vivendi owns Blizzard and isnt even in the new name at all.
Yes, but throwing the Blizzard name onto some of the things Activision publishes will dilute the perceived quality that Blizzard games automatically get saddled with.
As said above, I just hope this doesn't signal the downward spiral of Blizzard Quality. Blizzard has always been dependable for polished games that just click and are as easy to use as you can hope. The end of thatt would be a darn shame.
However, I do buy a lot of activision games as well, so maybe this is a good thing instead of Madden 2018471.
I can't see anything positive coming out of this.
The again, Blizzard's actual contribution to gaming is pretty low (by which i mean the number of game releases).
I hope for all the Craft fans that those titles keep quality.
Hopefully Activision games get better.
Well there you go, now Blizzard can NEVER start a new franchise.
Because in everyone's minds, when they publish a Craft/Diablo, it'll be a Blizzard game; but when they publish anything else, it'll be an Activision game.
...I read this twice before coming in, and it still makes little sense.
I mean, why would either of these companies want to merge? They're both making $Texas, they're both extremely profitable on their own. I see that the stated goal is to use Activision's console knowledge and Blizzard's PC knowledge to dominate the world, but even so.
Obviously this is a sign of a Starcraft MMOFPS. "Alright, we got MMO's down, and starcraft seems to be coming out pretty well too. We really don't want to fuck up this whole MMO thing though... idea's?"
"Merge with activision? I hear them call of duty games are good..."
I actually see this more as a corporate power-play than anything else. I'm sure Blizzard and Activision noticed a growing trend of EA gobbling up...well, everything in the gaming industry and merged to prevent that from happening to their companies.
I think the fears of Blizzard quality going down are unfounded, since Activision is a great game developer, and both companies will probably benefit from their designers bouncing ideas off each other.
I much prefer this to EA being able to force either company to merge with it 5-10 years down the line.
The goal of a company isn't to remain stagnant...it's to grow, either through revenue, free cash flow, or in market share. They want more of the market and are competing and the best way to do that sometimes is merge.
The goal of a company isn't to remain stagnant...it's to grow, either through revenue, free cash flow, or in market share. They want more of the market and are competing and the best way to do that sometimes is merge.
Posts
My Backloggery
Kind of a surprising move on Bilzzards part.
Yeah, I would have guessed they would have gone independent a long time ago.
Why is it that the first thing that comes to my mind is World of Warcraft with the gibs of Soldier of Fortune?
The second thing however is Diablo 3...with more blood.
T-shirts | Last.fm | Flickr | dA
Are they not making ENOUGH money as it is? What, are they planning on taking down EA in a bare handed wrestling match or something?
yes please.
This is still weird as hell though.
Nintendo?
So Blizzard, being that they are rolling in €€€€€££$$$$$ decides to join a company that does not have the same money making machine? And they hand CEO over to them as well? And invest more.
My Backloggery
Do you even know how much money Activision make?
Yes. But still. Even disregarding WoW, the Blizzard brand is undoubtedly one of the best brands to throw onto something. I'm not sure why they'd dilute it. Except moar money of course.
I'd hardly say it was being diluted. Short of blizzard flat out buying Activision (they wouldnt and most certainly couldnt) the name Activision Blizzard is about as high profile as they could have asked for.
Especially considering Vivendi owns Blizzard and isnt even in the new name at all.
Yes, but throwing the Blizzard name onto some of the things Activision publishes will dilute the perceived quality that Blizzard games automatically get saddled with.
https://medium.com/@alascii
However, I do buy a lot of activision games as well, so maybe this is a good thing instead of Madden 2018471.
or perhaps Call of Warcraft
Or Tony Hawk's Call of Warcraft
The again, Blizzard's actual contribution to gaming is pretty low (by which i mean the number of game releases).
I hope for all the Craft fans that those titles keep quality.
Hopefully Activision games get better.
Have I slept for 4 months. Is it April 1st?
Because in everyone's minds, when they publish a Craft/Diablo, it'll be a Blizzard game; but when they publish anything else, it'll be an Activision game.
we also talk about other random shit and clown upon each other
I mean, why would either of these companies want to merge? They're both making $Texas, they're both extremely profitable on their own. I see that the stated goal is to use Activision's console knowledge and Blizzard's PC knowledge to dominate the world, but even so.
The whole thing confuses me.
This didn't come out of left field, it wasn't even in the fucking park.
US justice department and the british/eu equivalent will prevent them from merging
"Merge with activision? I hear them call of duty games are good..."
"Hell, why not? We can afford it"
3ds friend code: 2981-6032-4118
I think the fears of Blizzard quality going down are unfounded, since Activision is a great game developer, and both companies will probably benefit from their designers bouncing ideas off each other.
I much prefer this to EA being able to force either company to merge with it 5-10 years down the line.
This is one of those times when you know you're in one of the totally fucked alternate dimensions.
EDIT: Well we know what Monday's P-A comic will be about if they haven't made it yet.
I hate Blizzard and wish them a horrible doom.