Huh. I guess they both looked at their large open-world post-apocalyptic first-person titles and decided they had better either sue each other or work together. Now they just need to bring in Gearbox.

I figure, better Zenimax than Activision.

I dunno, are these mergers really that bad? I mean, we have so many games coming out as it is, if this manages to make teams a little bit more consolidated and combine technologies... Wouldn't we, in theory, get more games of higher quality?

Besides, genre-combos are all the rage these days and if we could have more solid RPGs with actual good FPS mechanics behind them.. I'd be all for it. I mean, Imagine Fallout 3 being a competent shooter with non-zombie faced ladies. I'd be all over that. Rawr.

It would be a shame if Bethesda didn't at least consider using id Tech 5 for their future games.

I would wager a shiny sixpence that someone at Zenimax was impressed with Id Tech 5 as an engine. Sort of like when EA bought criterion for that Renderware cash.

Is Zenimax a public company though?

I guess you're quite right. It does never tend to happen... But it should! MORE CROSSOVER! Growl. I hate seeing two mediocre games, each with a single aspect that is truly awesome, when there could have just as easily been one game that had two awesome aspects. Like (isolated example here, not really with the topic) playing Mirrors Edge / Fallout 3 back to back. Man, would it have been nice to climb onto things in Fallout 3. Or out of holes. Or do anything more acrobatic than the usual jump.

It's not a merger like the Bioware and Mythic one; it's Bethesda's parent company (key words) buying up id. There might be some cross pollination between the two devs, but probably not as big as people are wishing for.

This is totally disappointing. I wonder if id just ran out of cash? Because having that independent capitol gives you the freedom to take your time developing i.e: Valve or Apple.

The most likely case.

Did Id actually license their engine to any high-profile title in the recent memory? I don't remember any. Published any new games of their own? Neither. They just don't have a stable revenue stream anymore, I guess.

The engine licensing business is just not what it used to be anymore. There's tons of technically mature, competent talent in the industry, both domestically and globally. 10 years ago, it was Sweeney vs Carmack pushing the envelope every 3 years or so. Now the envelope is being pushed around the clock, around the globe.

Epic was smart and got ahead of the curve by not marketing engines and publishing boring-to-play showcase tech demos, but by focusing on creating highly successful games.

I checked Wikipedia after you posted this, expecting a decent list like with the previous Tech engines, but was surprised at how few there were. Then I was outright shocked at the slew of games using Unreal Engine 3.

Valve selling seems unlikely. It does seem clear that id did this because they felt it would be beneficial to be part of a company which is a publisher and would allow them to capitalize of their various IPs without trying to bend id over backwards. Valve is already a publisher. I also think Valve is probably one of the best companies when it comes to costs.

Ubeatitsoft I think would be the winner.

This is very surprising but it could be a good move and I'm much happier to see them sell to ZeniMax who seems to be really on a hot streak and who has more of a foothold in the AAA publishing space than I would expect from a company their size. I can't imagine what Activision or the like would do with them. I think a merger of this nature (Carmack is calling it more of a merger) is good because id will probably have a lot of influence in the company and will be able to maintain their current method of doing things. And since ZeniMax is private (something which they flaunt), they aren't as beholden to short-sighted investors who will want stuff pushed out before it is ready.

If I had to guess as to why this was necessary, it is probably because id's engine licensing business has been devastated this generation by Unreal 3. I think they were trying to give their tech many of the developer friendliness of Unreal 3 with Tech 5 but that still isn't out yet. I would imagine that id funded much of their game development with engine licenses and without that money coming in, they just couldn't manage without a bigger force backing them up.

Compared to many developer buyouts which I can see as a bad thing, I think this one has the potential to be beneficial for both parties and that gamers probably won't notice much of a change in id's way of doing things. Still, really surprising.

For a very long time, id Software was an untouchable bastion of awesome and we all stood in line to buy their newest game without ever even thinking that it could be anything less than perfect. Sometime back in 2004 a lot of us upgraded our systems to be ready for the latest incarnation of the legend, only to be presented with a technically beautiful but soulless flashlight simulation called Doom 3.

It's been mostly downhill for id since then, albeit at a shallow grade. id Software has still made some good games, but nothing that was truly at the top of the genre. In the meanwhile Epic has been busy making fun games and licensing their tech to anyone with a computer and a Mastercard, and generally taking over id's position as the premiere shooting game provider.

While a part of me is sad to see a studio that defined PC gaming become just another part of a publisher's portfolio, I'm generally thrilled to see they'll be keeping company with the likes of Bethesda. Hopefully the acquisition will prove to be a good thing for all involved and we'll actually start seeing id put out more games with the old id magic in them.