World of Activisioncraft

In case you haven't heard, Activision and Blizzard are merging. The spate of mergers the games industry is experiencing is testament to the tough economic conditions that exist right now as a result of the transition to a new generation of consoles. Early in the new console cycle, companies merge. Later in the console cycle, people take advantage of the greater prosperity and break off and form offshoot companies.

It's easy to see what Activision has to gain in this merger, but I'm at a loss to see what's in it for Blizzard other than a big pile of money.

Comments

[Patrick]

Its not really Blizzard, its Vivendi, its just that Blizzard is the only decent component of Vivendi so they use that name because people know it.

[Ophelea]

Blizzard gets their name on the 3 (it may be 5) upcoming online titles that Sierra Online is producing. And I don't mean localizing.

Most are casual. I know at least one is aimed at males aged 14-18. And to date, Blizzard has had NOTHING to do with the design, development and production.

When they launch, they will have the Blizzard name - a guarantee of success - but also showing how fantastic Blizzard is at creating MMOGs.

[Chris]

Patrick: thanks for pointing this out; I knew that Vivendi owned Blizzard but it slipped my mind when writing this that this is a merger between Activision and Vivendi. That clears up my confusion as to what's in it for Blizzard, since Vivendi have nothing worth shouting about except World of Warcraft. (I have a low opinion about Vivendi, in part for screwing us over with Ghost Master).

Ophelia: you leave the implication for the reader, but you seem to strongly disapprove of this "brand attachment" process which places a name on something otherwise unconnected.

I found it most offensive when hum-drum French publisher Infogrames decided to purchase and adopt the brand name "Atari", a company whose sterling legacy it had absolutely no connection with whatsoever.

Best wishes!