Microsoft squiring Activision/Blizzard

Eric

Mama's lil stinker
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
8,937
Reaction score
17,413
Location
California
Instagram
Main Camera
Sony

dukebound85

Power User
Posts
56
Reaction score
68

That’s a lot of money. Wonder if there are antitrust issues here.

Once completed, the acquisition will turn Microsoft into the world's third-largest gaming company by revenue, behind Tencent and Sony.[/quote}

I wouldn't think so with the above being the case
 

Cmaier

Elite Member
Staff Member
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
3,417
Reaction score
4,841
The antitrust question would be, essentially, whether it reduces competition and raises prices in some defined market, and not whether or not there are still bigger competitors. I expect there will be some scrutiny, but what happens is anybody’s guess.
 

SuperMatt

Site Master
Posts
7,779
Reaction score
14,777
They decided they are big fans of the Activision corporate culture? Microsoft really needs more toxic masculinity I guess.
 

DT

I am so Smart! S-M-R-T!
Vaccinated
Posts
6,406
Reaction score
10,446
Location
Moe's
Main Camera
iPhone
I'm sure there's also some concern, re: does this mean X/Y/Z game will become an MS platform (Windows/XBOX) exclusive?

I mean, certainly that's a balance between losing a whole platform worth of buyers (Playstation) vs. gaining new buyers for an MS platform. I'm sure MS would love to funnel people into their ecosystem, and simply development by using their tech stack.


Next up: MS buys Nintendo.
 

Ulenspiegel

διπλωμάτης
Vaccinated
Posts
313
Reaction score
536
Or they simply like to play World of Warcraft...

Or the kid of some MS owner has been hunting for some rare drops w/o success.

Problem solved. Post-Christmas present...

P.S.: Good timing from Blizzard, btw... they are having some serious issues, losing subscribers.
 

Nycturne

Site Champ
Vaccinated
Posts
544
Reaction score
628
Wow that's a huge acquisition, looks like MS is buying out the competition in the same way FB did with social networks.

Maybe the term competition is used loosely here, but this is a bit murkier than simply buying a competitor, since this is a vertical integration move.

It will deny Sony’s platform access to the catalog down the road though, much like the Bethesda purchase, which will limit competition that way. That’s really the push for this, IMO. Microsoft has had limited success trying to be a neutral platform with limited first party development support, and I suspect they are looking to create a stronger environment for exclusive titles on their side of the fence.

They decided they are big fans of the Activision corporate culture? Microsoft really needs more toxic masculinity I guess.

This is definitely the thing that confuses me. The culture at Microsoft has been pushing away from the Gates/Ballmer culture for years now (with limited success admittedly). But I have little to no visibility into this part of the company, and the company is large enough that each organization can have its own culture and identity to some extent.

I half wonder if this is a case where they feel like the culture is something that can be “fixed” once Kotick and the like are swept out of the way.
 

Nycturne

Site Champ
Vaccinated
Posts
544
Reaction score
628
I’m kinda surprised it’s taking this long to devolve into a full fledged duopoly.
 

Chew Toy McCoy

Pleb
Vaccinated
Site Donor
Posts
6,121
Reaction score
9,410
I look forward to playing World of Monopolycraft.

Here's how antitrust laws work in the US now. If you own all the farmland in the US (Bill Gates actually does own the most) as long as there's some guy standing on a corner selling oranges from the tree in his backyard then you don't have a monopoly and aren't considered unfair to competition. That's mostly an analogy but also true.

We could probably save some tax dollars by removing the symbolic middle men that are politicians and just officially say CEOs are in charge of everything.
 

Andropov

Site Champ
Vaccinated
Posts
316
Reaction score
261
Location
Spain
I’m kinda surprised it’s taking this long to devolve into a full fledged duopoly.
There'll always be indie devs to avoid a complete duopoly but yeah, AAA games will soon be a duopoly (with maybe one big independent studio like Rockstar) and medium size games will disappear.
 

Nycturne

Site Champ
Vaccinated
Posts
544
Reaction score
628
There'll always be indie devs to avoid a complete duopoly but yeah, AAA games will soon be a duopoly (with maybe one big independent studio like Rockstar) and medium size games will disappear.

It’s not like the indie devs can escape the effects of either MS/Sony or Apple/Google though if they want access to consoles or mobile devices respectively (which form a majority of the addressable market for video games). And it’s that control that defines a duopoly, not the absence of smaller players. It’s ironic that the Mac/PC is still the easiest place for small devs right now to not have to deal with publishing rules/etc if they don’t want to.

I look forward to playing World of Monopolycraft.

Here's how antitrust laws work in the US now. If you own all the farmland in the US (Bill Gates actually does own the most) as long as there's some guy standing on a corner selling oranges from the tree in his backyard then you don't have a monopoly and aren't considered unfair to competition. That's mostly an analogy but also true.

Part of it is that US courts have interpreted the law not so much that monopolies themselves are illegal, but rather certain conduct is. While US anti-trust law is considered some of the strongest in the world, it also still leaves a lot of wiggle room for anti-competitive behaviors, and weird gotchas where further consolidation is potentially less evil (i.e. sustaining and strengthening an oligarchy in AT&T/Verizon/T-Mobile with the aim of preventing a duopoly of AT&T/Verizon).

I do wish there were stronger protections in place to block excessive consolidation that leads to anti-competitive oligarchies, or remedies against such oligarchies in general.
 

Colstan

Practicing Phrenologist
Vaccinated
Posts
344
Reaction score
477
It looks like Microsoft is going to have a governmental speed bump along their way to gaming dominance.


This is the wrong climate for big mergers in the tech industry. Apple has typically kept their projects in-house, so it's no surprise that they haven't moved to acquire a company like Electronic Arts, as was rumored, but this is even more incentive to not bother. We've already seen a somewhat similar thing play out with Nvidia.
 

diamond.g

Power User
Posts
159
Reaction score
61
It looks like Microsoft is going to have a governmental speed bump along their way to gaming dominance.


This is the wrong climate for big mergers in the tech industry. Apple has typically kept their projects in-house, so it's no surprise that they haven't moved to acquire a company like Electronic Arts, as was rumored, but this is even more incentive to not bother. We've already seen a somewhat similar thing play out with Nvidia.
This is probably happening because Sony is pitching a fit over Call of Duty.
 

Renzatic

Egg Nog King of the Eastern Seaboard
Vaccinated
Posts
3,740
Reaction score
6,481
Location
Dinosaurs
MS is doing for GamePass what Apple should be doing for Apple Arcade.

Other than being able to stream games, they're doing roughly the same thing, aren't they? You pay so much a month to download as many games as you want?
 

diamond.g

Power User
Posts
159
Reaction score
61
Other than being able to stream games, they're doing roughly the same thing, aren't they? You pay so much a month to download as many games as you want?
They are buying games to make the service worthwhile. If they get Activision/Blizzard those games will end up on GP as well (so no need to buy CoD every year). If Apple were to do the same Resident Evil 8 should have been on Apple Arcade (same with the games made by Feral Interactive and the upcoming No Mans Sky).
 
Top Bottom