this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2023
180 points (100.0% liked)

Gaming

30536 readers
205 users here now

From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!

Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.

See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

https://www.theverge.com/2023/7/11/23779039/microsoft-activision-blizzard-ftc-trial-win

From the article, quoting Judge Corley:

... the Court finds the FTC has not shown a likelihood it will prevail on its claim this particular vertical merger in this specific industry may substantially lessen competition. To the contrary, the record evidence points to more consumer access to Call of Duty and other Activision content. The motion for a preliminary injunction is therefore DENIED.

#gaming @gaming

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 67 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The consolidation of the gaming industry will be just another tale of oligopoly in a capitalist society I guess. Yaaay.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

We're heading towards the balkanization of all digital content, DRM is the method they will use to enforce their rule.

Piracy isn't just moral at this stage, you're obligated to participate as a means to resist.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Despite not pirating PC games due to not wanting to risk viruses I am very invested in the cracking scene, since they lead to positive outcomes of some companies removing DRM earlier if a crack comes out. Used to be they'd just be left in indefinitely. Thank you pirates.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The indie industry is also growing a lot these days

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Agreed, besides for a few companies in the triple A space the indie scene has grown so much to the point where I don’t feel like I’m missing out on great gameplay, stories, and/or graphics anymore.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 53 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I think everyone saying market consolidation is bad is missing the point for this particular one.

This isn't Google buying and killing another product. This isn't AT&T buying and merging something. This is the failed company Activision that bought Blizzard and tarnished its name and branding once again being sold off.

What's more, this is (effectively) the death of Activision. The bane on gaming since it first started mouthing syllables to the words "corporate profits".

I can only really see this as a good thing from pretty much any angle you try to look at it from. The fact that the only thing all the comments here have to say is that "consolidation bad" should be very telling. I'm no fan of Microsoft, but they generally let departments have a vision and execute them. They seem to have less awful stories than most tech cultures, so one would imagine that going from managers who don't care or are actively participating in hazing you to a place where you are given the space to foster your creative ideas... I'm gonna say this consolidation is probably a good thing if only because of the small chance that the workplace culture changes. In regards to the company, there may even finally be a litany of IP have a chance of seeing the light of day again!

Time will tell of course but I'd say all you need to do is read the timeline. The last decade has been nothing but awful actions from Blizzard leading up to the buyout, ranging from people doing multiple different boycotts against them for Blitzchang to their now parent company Activision just going full 1970. Microsoft will never be a golden pinnacle of perfection but they haven't been fostering workplaces where people feel fear and have their freaking bodily fluids stolen.

I guess I'll put it this way. Would you rather have the execs behind CoD and WoW or would you rather have the execs behind Halo and Starfield?

Both suck but one is clearly trying to allow space for heart to exist while having lots of skeletons and decomposing corpses in the closet while the other is whipping its junk out and rubbing it in your face while laughing about making skeletons... too much? lol

[–] [email protected] 26 points 1 year ago (12 children)

"Execs behind Starfield"

The same execs that bought the company already half way through development of Starfield, and rather than delivering anything new or of value, only wanted to make sure it was extinguished on other systems?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Okay there... And before thay Sony was trying to lock Starfield away on their side so what's your point? The current market is driven by exclusives thanks very much to Sony and Nintendo.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

And Sony and Nintendo aggressively want to push towards proprietary hardware exclusives. Sony has improved in that area, but every exclusive is still a big question on if it'll even be available on the PC and if so when. Just the long release schedule is an attempt to draw more people who can't wait to a proprietary closed ecosystem.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s almost certainly a positive to see Bobby Kotick (boy do I struggle to maintain this site’s cardinal rule as far as he goes ) losing influence in the “AAA” games industry; but it’s not good to see MS buying every studio they can get hold of. Both these things can be true simultaneously.

My biggest concern with MS’s rampant acquisition spree is what happens when there’a an economic downturn (as already seems to be the near future); will those newly acquired studio be subject to the corporate euphemism that is ~dOWnSiZiNg~? How many working on moderately niche titles will be out of a job and their work indefinitely shelved?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

To be clear, overall I don't disagree that more consolidation is bad. It's literally just this instance. Activision needs to die and be restructured.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (5 children)

lemmy needs an op indicator

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

I don't see this as a bad thing but it's also not a great thing. It's like watching one village-crushing giant team up with another village-crushing giant because one of the giants isn't crushing enough villages to be healthy. So they will now crush villages together in hopes both can eat a lot better.

It's like aww, they found family... But also they'll probably crush us at noon so there is that.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

Your comment made me step back a minute, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I tend to agree with your assessment after looking at this scenario more closely. I'm no fan of Microsoft but Activision isn't exactly a great studio. Only time will tell!

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

My main argument against the acquisition is that the morons behind Activision/Blizzard will get a ridiculous payout

These people should get a lifetime ban from executive positions, not a payout

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 48 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Seriously though? They bought Bethesda and look what they're doing there. Now they get to add another massive developer as if they weren't already ridiculously huge? This monopoly stuff has to end. I don't just mean gaming either. Like 5 companies control our entire food supply. There can only be one internet provider in any area. It's insane.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago

This is the inevitable conclusion to free-market based economies. The market will pick winners, and those winners will then have a capital advantage over all new entrants, allowing them to outcompete anyone they want, and to use their size to control the market at large. It’s literally built into the system. The attempts at reform we try are rolled back eventually, and we end up in the same place again. Ma Bell broke up, and for a while we had competition across the industry and innovation. Eventually, market leaders were picked, and we end up where we are now, with few options, and little difference between the ones we have.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Oligopoly, not monopoly. Monopoly implies there's just 1 company. In gaming there is far from one company.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

This monopoly stuff has to end.

Microsoft aren't a monopoly, especially in gaming. Even buying ABK they won't be even remotely close to a monopoly.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

On one hand this just means further consolidation of an already oligopolic industry. On the other hand, Activision is a terrible company run by a terrible man, so it's not like things could get much worse.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

It's not really about Activision being bought though, it's about Microsoft buying them.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

To be honest, this is why I've been of two minds regarding the whole thing.

ActivisionBlizzard needs a complete structural change. That's not going to happen without someone else acquiring them, which they were seeking out themselves.

That it's Microsoft who did that kind of sucks, but if not them, it probably would have just been someone like Embracer who's also currently consolidating a lot of IP. Tencent is another option.

If Sony acquired them, it would have led to the same fight, only it'd be Microsoft complaining.

I understand why Microsoft is probably one of the worse options here, due to Game Pass and having their own console, but I don't think there was ever going to be a good outcome for everyone here. It was ActBlizz who wanted to sell and it was never going to be a cheap acquisition.

Some other deal would have gone through (and be challenged), and I think people would still have issues with it regarding their market share.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (5 children)

I still don't understand all the people who are cheering this on. Why is consolidation of the industry a good thing. Is it really just because you want the games on gamepass?

Edit: in retrospect, I do agree I would be happy to see the leadership be ousted from acti-blizz. Since the merger is happening, I may as well see the good in it (if they are indeed getting ousted, that remains to be seen). I do think it is a worrying trend overall though

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (3 children)

It's less the focus on consolidation and more getting out the very problematic leadership from Activision (Bobby and his crew). Not that Microsoft is a bastion of progressive thought or leadership, but it's suspected they would be much less likely to have covered up things like the Cosby room, suicide due to harassment, or the theft of breast milk. Activision's leadership has some deep seated problems with sexism in general.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 year ago

Yeah this is how I feel. I don't think that stopping this merger is going to make triple a games a much less hyper-capitalistic hellscape but I feel like forcing a change of hands might mean better conditions for the abk devs, because from what I've heard from friends that have worked at Microsoft's studios they've got a decent track record for employee care. Nothing remarkable, mind, but if it gets the devs away from toxic hypermasculine leadership and also gives them more security to make better games, I'm willing to nod the merger along. ABK's games have long had a human cost that I'm not super keen to see them continue to pay yknow

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

is there any indication that microsoft intends to clean house?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

Like @[email protected] mentions, they did intend to clean house by dropping the board with a buyout.

I, personally, am not too bothered by the consolidation of game studios. There are plenty of AAA game developers and indie devs are filling other niches (and sometimes become AAA themselves). It's a different industry from something like making cars with high production costs and huge barriers to entry.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

A ton of the shit comes straight from the board of directors, who will no longer have a board because MS is absorbing and buying out all shareholders.

We know Bobby is leaving for a fact as well, as he has a buyout clause in his contract.

Short term, this is excision of a cancer from the industry. Long term this kind of consolidation is bad for competition. I'll be happy when MS gets inevitably trust busted.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

As primarily a Playstation and Nintendo gamer, I think this acquisition is going to be 99% bad news for me. Oh well.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (10 children)

Can I ask why? Microsoft has a monetary incentive to push the games to other platforms wherever possible. Yeah they may hold a few back (see Starfield) to try and sell consoles but I don't expect them to withhold all. There were some interesting articles that this deal is more about the mobile gaming (King) rather than COD or other AB games.

As an Xbox and Nintendo owner I feel Sony/Nintendo have done more harm to the industry by reinforcing exclusives (both times and complete) than Microsoft. Wouldn't it be in Microsoft's right to do what the market leaders are doing and take advantage of exclusives to try and gain market share back? We also saw with testimony/discovery during the trial that Sony would often say one thing publicly and another internally. I think Sony only opposed this cause they wanted to stoke the fire of fandoms.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Microsoft are no longer interested in selling consoles necessarily, otherwise they'd be holding stuff back from PC as well. They're interested in getting people into their ecosystem through Game Pass.

And while I agree with you that Sony and Nintendo have used plenty of anti-consumer practices, Microsoft has also done so in the past and I think the only reason they've been more pro-consumer of late is because they've been the underdog for a long time now. I would be anticipating a change in their behaviour the more people they get to subscribe to Game Pass, and this Activision-Blizzard deal is a huge step towards that.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago (7 children)

So how long until Microsoft restricts all Activision or Blizzard games to being only on Xbox or PC?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

im still waiting to play spider-man and god of war

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Apples and oranges. Those were created as Playstation exclusives, not an existing property potentially made exclusive years after the fact. Decades later, Mario games are still almost entirely Nintendo-only. That's the comparison for God of War, not Call of Duty.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (6 children)

It's still an example of why some prefer Microsoft, since Sony and Nintendo are still very much in the business of pushing people towards using proprietary hardware. Even Linux and Mac users benefit from a game coming out to PC versus console only or a delayed PC release despite no native port with improvements in proton and Mac's Game Porting tool.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I think they might go the other way and use it as leverage to push Sony to release cross platform games

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

Boooo. Competition is always better in capitalism. Even Activision blizzard as terrible as they are, is competition. No one should be happy about this after how they've gobbled up a huge chunk of the gaming market.

How long until we're forced to log into these games with Microsoft accounts and pay for Xbox live

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Normally, I would not be happy about this, but this is the exception. Even as a Mac gamer (and please don’t at me - I have had decades of sass coming from the PC community. Let me enjoy my platform. I get what I need) this is a win. Activision was always poison for Blizzard. At the bare minimum, Microsoft will enforce corporate HR standards - may not be awesome standards, but it’s a lot better than Activision turning a blind eye. And it’s in Microsoft’s best interest to support native Mac development where it exists (and while I don’t see Blizzard ramping up their Mac dev team to previous (if meager) levels, I expect that the games I enjoy will continue to work fine on my machine, which is a modest ask.

I mean, if Microsoft bent over backwards to prop up Apple in those dark days (and you could have concussed me with a feather when Gates announced MS was investing in Apple IIRC on stage during an Apple keynote) they’ll support other platforms.

Should all gaming fall under several big umbrellas? No. But getting the Activision Board and C-suite out of the “day to day” of studio development can’t hurt.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

From what I've heard, Blizzard's C-suite and company culture was already poison before Activision. I'm not sure Microsoft will care about much more than getting a profit out of the deal.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

This is just the fight for the preliminary injunction. The FTC can still use antitrust proceedings to prevent/unwind the merger.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We often forget that big companies have been broken up before.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

When was the last time that happened? It's not really a thing anymore in our current environment.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

According to this article, in the US, it looks like 1982. It was AT&T. But it looks like they are currently trying to break up Meta.

I thought Microsoft had split too, but they mention that in the article and say they never actually split. I thought Intel was also split at one point, but it's not listed here, so I'm probably wrong.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

Microsoft lost an antitrust lawsuit a long time ago regarding making internet explorer a required part of Windows, so they had to allow other browsers in Windows for competition's sake, but they didn't get broken up. That might be what you are thinking of. I can't think of anything Intel related though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

I'm pretty sure there's like 3 companies that own around 80% of the US grocery market. There's a reason why avian flu drove the price of eggs up everywhere and its because one company owns the majority of egg production.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I'd like to see this go through just to get Bobby Kotick out.

load more comments
view more: next ›