It generally doesn’t work out
So, it looks like Activisionis buying King.ThatKing, the one who makesCandy Crush. I can’t say that it doesn’t make sense, but that doesn’t mean it’s any less surprising. I’m trying to think of when a situation like this has actually worked out for consumers though, and I’m not coming up with much. I’ve seen countless defunct studios (Bizarre Creations) fall in the wake of their buyer, in addition to ones who have been crippled and are a shell of their former self (BioWare).
But in some ways, I’m actually okay with this situation. Look, traditional publishers often find themselves in the red these days, looking to the mobile avenue for profits. In the case of Activision, I still think Blizzard (who was bought by the same company, funnily enough) makes really great games — if King’s mobile revenue keeps letting them do that, so be it. Big publishers really need to start making moves now to account for an increased casual audience beyond anything that the Wii brought to the table. Heck, Nintendo seems to be doing a two-fold strategy with the NX and their DeNA mobile titles.
The jury is still out on Activision and King (what’s next,Candy Crushinside ofStarCraft II?), but a few other instances of publishers purchasing developers have worked out in the past. For instance, I was pretty okay with Monolith Soft being sold to Nintendo in 2007. It might be a rare occurrence, but what was one such positive situation on your end?
