Murdoch eyes gaming

[SAS]

Good or bad news, you decide. Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation group have confirmed they are are seeking an acquisition in the games industry sector.

Speaking at a US investment conference, Peter Chernin admitted that News Corp was "kicking the tires of pretty much all video games companies" - up to and including market leader Electronic Arts.
"We see [games] as a big business and would like to get into it," Chernin told the conference, according to a report in today's Financial Times.

Any thoughts on what this could mean for us the gamers?

 

[Mazling]

doomed, DOOMED ...

 

[DaGaffer]

I guarantee that if NewsCorp tried to buy EA, Time Warner would step in first (EA & TW are pretty close already - most TW licences until this year are EA games). Activision is a more likely target, and there's a few others they could pick up on the cheap as well.

Its inevitable and there's no point in worrying about it, a world of fewer, larger publishers has been on the cards for a long time.

 

[RandomBastard]

The problem is ea is a bad thing

Fewer larger publishers i feel are a bad thing.

 

[Konah]

more investment = more games

shouldnt worry about it, hes getting into it to make money, he will only make money by making good games.

 

[Escape]

Everyone makes games to make money, but only 5% of games released are worth playing


Publishers have always been bad for games and having 'big name' publishers just makes it worse. They keep developers on a tight schedule and restrict creativity.

"No! the public doesn't want to see that, they want to see more HALO! Yes, forget your foolishly original ideas and give us a HALO clone"

 

[Ning]

they're going to make propaganda in video games ?

 

[Sharma]

more investment = more games

shouldnt worry about it, hes getting into it to make money, he will only make money by making good games.

Either a few good games that sell well, or a load of crap games that sell badly.

 

[Chilly]

i smell more ingame advertising if this kind of shit happens, anyone read a book called The Other Eden by Ben Elton?

 

[Custodian]

If more developers go the way of Valve and make their games available direct from them then what difference does it make who owns the publishers

 

[Chilly]

If more developers go the way of Valve and make their games available direct from them then what difference does it make who owns the publishers

who did the publishing for the tangable release?

 

[DaGaffer]

If more developers go the way of Valve and make their games available direct from them then what difference does it make who owns the publishers

Valve sells hardcore games to a largely technically-literate audience (and its still a pain in the arse), its going to be a long time before the mass market audience downloads as a matter of routine, and when they do, they won't want to trawl from developer to developer (mainly because they won't have a clue where to look). Publishers (and retailers) fulfil a necessary role for most customers (also bear in mind most games are bought at Christmas, as gifts) and will continue to do so. Even when downloading becomes mass market, Steam will be the minority way to do it, most people will use their portal (e.g. Xbox Live! or Yahoo!) or their ISP, or maybe a their 'superpublisher' (which will probably end up being about half a dozen big companies outside of the platform owners).

 

[Custodian]

Wasn't just thinking steam tbh.
Was thinking further ahead to when the widespread use of broadband (proper broadband) means downloading content (games, films, tv, music) becomes the norm. Steam is a clue to the fact that it can work, but can't see it being mass market. Although... hasn't another game already licensed it?
I have been playing a game (beta) that works completely downloaded, in fact still can't work out why the final release is gunna be to a cd in a shop.

Anyway... yes... more likely to be BT Yahoo or AOL downloader for the mainstream.
And there we go... full circle... AOL :/