We store cookies, you can get more info from our privacy policy.

Vivendi, Activision Merge to Form Activision Blizzard

by Steven Rodriguez - December 2, 2007, 11:51 am EST
Total comments: 36 Source: Blizzard Entertainment

The new publisher will effectively become the largest third party in the industry.

In what may very well be the biggest news story of 2007, Activision and Vivendi Games have jointly announced that they will be joining forces to create Activision Blizzard. Vivendi, which owns Blizzard Entertainment, will have a 52% stake in the newly formed publishing label, making it the controlling shareholder. Vivendi's operations and properties will fall under current Activision management. The transaction, valued at $18.9 billion dollars in stock and cash, will make Activision Blizzard "the world's largest pure-play online and console game publisher," according to the new company.

Activision has been going through its most successful period in its history, seeing record sales and profits due to games like Guitar Hero III, Call of Duty 4, and Tony Hawk's Proving Ground. Vivendi has the Crash Bandicoot and Spyro properties, but is best known for owning Blizzard Entertainment, the juggernaut online games maker. StarCraft, Diablo, and Warcraft are some of the biggest names in gaming, and World of Warcraft is the most successful MMO ever created with 9.3 million subscribers. The release of the long-awaited StarCraft II is also on the horizon.

Robert Kotick, Activision chairman and CEO, says the merger benefits both companies because of their strengths in different areas. "By combining leaders in mass-market entertainment and subscription-based online games, Activision Blizzard will be the only publisher with leading market positions across all categories of the rapidly growing interactive entertainment software industry and reach the broadest possible audiences."

As a result of the Activision Blizzard merger, the new label is expected to have a combined revenue stream of $3.8 billion in 2007, which will be the largest income total for any third-party publisher.

Thanks to lord_die_seis for the news tip!

Talkback

Woah.

AzureNightmareBrad Mosbacher, Features EditorDecember 02, 2007

Holy crap!

edit: Holy crapping crap!

BlackNMild2k1December 02, 2007

gutcheck.gif
.........^ActiBlizzion .................^EA

WindyManSteven Rodriguez, Staff AlumnusDecember 02, 2007

I prefer Actiblizz, myself.

BlackNMild2k1December 02, 2007

either or is better than Activision Blizzard, it just that ActiBlizz just sounds short for ActiBlizzion anyway, so it doesn't really matter.

edit: The NEW site is up

www.activisionblizzard.com

The SailermanDecember 02, 2007

Wow, this bodes well for the next Guitar Hero!
Vivendi owns Universal Music Group, which I believe is the largest music business in the world, and now Activision has full access to their songs!

ShyGuyDecember 02, 2007

I want some 70th Level Tauren Chieftain in the next Guitar Hero.

BlackNMild2k1December 02, 2007

I posted this in the other thread in the "General Gaming" section

Artist under UMG including Prince face-icon-small-wink.gif

This still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Viviendi has non-Blizzard IPs, so why name the company after Blizzard? I recognize that WoW is a goldmine (pun intended), but still.

that Baby guyDecember 02, 2007

I imagine the Blizzard component of Vivendi was raking in more cash than the Vivendi portion of Vivendi to the extent that it was worth more. Besides, which of Vivendi's brands are your favorite?

GalfordDecember 02, 2007

This will not end well for the Industry.

What about Sierra? Are they just like "lolz you don't exist?" Besides, Activision Blizzard is the suckiest name ever.

This is something the SEC really shouldn't allow. In a market as deep as this one, the 2nd and 3rd place companies shouldn't be allowed to merge, it's what the anti-trust laws were put in place to prevent.

wulffman04December 02, 2007

Holy Crap! Didn't see that coming.

BlackNMild2k1December 02, 2007

From what I read, Blizzard invested 2 billion into the merger, and since they are the biggest money maker with the biggest brand and the biggest game and therefore the most influential part of Vivendi, their name was used along with Activision.

What Joe Schmoe would recognize Vivendi and associate it to gaming?

CericDecember 02, 2007

I don't think this applies for antitrust simply because you still have competative players in Nintendo, EA, and Ubisoft just to name a few.

Though I could see why they would want to go with Blizzard. It is there most respected name. Where Vivenda and Sierra only have pass glory, which I wish they would polish and resurrect

nickmitchDecember 02, 2007

I'm pretty damn stunned. Is it just me or did this come out of nowhere?

Blactivision.

Sounds like a BET with activist proposition.

WuTangTurtleDecember 02, 2007

seriously wtf is up with this cr@p, first i have to hear about EA taking over BioWare and Pandemic, and now I hear of this! Next it will be THQ buying......um what other good 3rd party companies are left?

EnnerDecember 02, 2007

This is an interesting turn of things. With this, there will be a bigger money pool for the developers the publishers have!

Okay, they'll most likely want to keep that money pool as is.

I'm know I'm in the minority, but I'm hoping that this really does help rather than hinder. Same goes for EA buying Bioware/Pandemic and reading the "don't worry!" interviews from each studio. Indeed I'm not worrying! History will tell the truth and it will be a very long time until it comes. In otherwords, I'm in favor holding over the more brutal negativity until it actually results in bad and/or disappointing games.

Nick DiMolaNick DiMola, Staff AlumnusDecember 03, 2007

This news is totally out of left field. I'm not sure all of these mergers are good for the industry and it will probably only make it harder for small devs to get into the industry. Maybe it will mean more money and more time for development, but I'm guessing that it will more than likely stifle innovation.

scot00December 03, 2007

I like the name Blizzard Vision..

But then again I dont count..

-S

KDR_11kDecember 03, 2007

Quote

Originally posted by: Ceric
I don't think this applies for antitrust simply because you still have competative players in Nintendo, EA, and Ubisoft just to name a few.


Antitrust would be about making sure those companis stay competitive afterwards.

StogiDecember 03, 2007

As long as the get Starcraft 2 out, I could care less what Blizzard does business wise. A couple of my friends STILL play starcraft every once and a while.

Ian SaneDecember 03, 2007

All I really care about is that Blizzard's quality doesn't slip. They've been almost perfect with Death and Return of Superman being their only dud I can think of. But they have been able to keep the quality up even while being owned by Vivendi so I'd assume this won't change things.

Still I wonder if having "Activision Blizzard" on every game is going to hurt Blizzard's reputation since mediocre licenced Activision games are going to be made with the Blizzard name on it. It will be less clear what games are "true" Blizzard titles.

EnnerDecember 03, 2007


Out of respect for all of the decent and good journalists here, please refrain from quoting GameSpot on anything.


-The Management


Alright. Duely noted.
I guess I'm in the wrong for not caring about this issue as much as management does and thinking that this is just a bit touchy on this? My thinking is that it was an interview which was far enough away from any clutchs that stifle opinions and free thought. Anyway, roger that on the GameSpot bannage. Guess I'm just not taking things seriously enough.


ANYWAY!
MEGER! HUGE! WOW!
It'll be interesting to see how this changes the industry landscape. Hopefully this will mean more money for the developers to play around with.

CericDecember 03, 2007

They should resurrect Sierra's adventure games on the Wii or whatever and put them in that niche.

AzureNightmareBrad Mosbacher, Features EditorDecember 03, 2007

Quote

Originally posted by: Enner
Alright. Duely noted.
I guess I'm in the wrong for not caring about this issue as much as management does and thinking that this is just a bit touchy on this? My thinking is that it was an interview which was far enough away from any clutchs that stifle opinions and free thought. Anyway, roger that on the GameSpot bannage. Guess I'm just not taking things seriously enough.


ANYWAY!
MEGER! HUGE! WOW!
It'll be interesting to see how this changes the industry landscape. Hopefully this will mean more money for the developers to play around with.


No problem, you just dont realize the repercussions it has for every hard working, honest member of the gaming press, which is no fault of yours.

GoldenPhoenixDecember 03, 2007

Censorship based on rumor FTW.

DjunknownDecember 03, 2007

Quote

Blactivision...Sounds like a BET with activist proposition.


If they EVER bring back Tavis Smiley, maybe, just maybe...

From Blizzards headline:

Quote

There will be no changes to our games, our websites, our personnel, or our day-to-day operations as a result of the deal. However, this combining of resources will benefit all of the companies involved and will further strengthen Blizzard's ability to continue delivering high-quality content for our players around the world for many years to come. To learn more about this exciting new development, please read our Activision Blizzard FAQ.


So for the time being, there will be no cross pollination on Blizzard's part (having them work on Activision's stuff) yet. Pretty much it sounds similar to EA's treatment of Bioware/Pandemic.

I'm sure EA is kicking itself for not taking Vivendi when they had the chance. But I'm sure it'll even itself out: Bioware has been consistent with releases in the past couple of years, whereas Blizzard has been banking with WoW for the past 3 years...

Just like the EA Bioware/Pandemic deal, this just gives Activision a cut of Blizzard's action and vice versa. Not that Blizzard needed more money, but maybe if Activision cracked the whip to get some of their titles out some before the decade is up. I'd like to play Starcraft 2 and Diablo 3 before I hit my mid-life crisis... face-icon-small-tongue.gif

18 DaysDecember 03, 2007

Heh, and just when EA were ruling out more mergers and takeovers.

DARN. Hey, who owns Neversoft? Darn it. Does Activision own them? They were a neat dev house! Ripe for acquisition! I was eyeing them!

GoldenPhoenixDecember 03, 2007

Quote

Originally posted by: Kairon
DARN. Hey, who owns Neversoft? Darn it. Does Activision own them? They were a neat dev house! Ripe for acquisition! I was eyeing them!


You probably do own them considering all the 3rd party games you buy.

BlackNMild2k1December 03, 2007

Quote

Originally posted by: Kairon
DARN. Hey, who owns Neversoft? Darn it. Does Activision own them? They were a neat dev house! Ripe for acquisition! I was eyeing them!

I posted this in the other thread too, but I'm not sure how complete/accurate it is.

Vivendi:
Blizzard Entertainment
High Moon Studios (Sierra Entertainment)
Massive Entertainment (Sierra Entertainment)
Radical Entertainment (Sierra Entertainment)
Swordfish Studios (Sierra Entertainment)

Activision:
Beenox
Bizarre Creations
Infinity Ward
Luxoflux Corp
Neversoft
Raven Software
Shaba Games
Toys for Bob
Treyarch
Vicarious Visions
Z-Axis


edited for clarity

Are those actual owned houses or simply affiliated houses? I didn't know they actually owned Toys for Bob, for one.

Got a news tip? Send it in!
Advertisement
Advertisement