Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft completes $69B deal to buy Activision Blizzard

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 590 posts

Re: Microsoft completes $69B deal to buy Activision Blizzard

#51

Post by k12sosse »

Sakos wrote: post #44
sofixa wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Each competition authority has their own criteria. But in this case, it will meaningfully reduce competition. For some reason UK's CMA only considered cloud gaming, which is a weird fixation. Maybe because it's an emerging market? If all Activison Blizzard games become Xbox exclusive will reduce competition and screw consumers, yet that was dropped as a concern for who knows what reason.

I just don't see how it meaningfully reduces competition. This barely moves the needle. If I look at the top sellers on Steam, the vast majority are not Activision Blizzard.

You mean the games that are sold on battle.net aren't being tracked by steam?

Re: Microsoft completes $69B deal to buy Activision Blizzard

#52

Post by k12sosse »

blibble wrote: post #7
beardyw wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The deal was accepted by every country but UK. Now the climb down.

the US FTC case is still ongoing, however unlike the CMA they don't seem to have statutory powers to prevent the merger if the FTC wins Microsoft would have to spin Activision out

Hopefully they can eat the IP and sell the shell

Re: Microsoft completes $69B deal to buy Activision Blizzard

#53

Post by nerdjon »

manuelabeledo wrote: post #45
nerdjon wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A few things, and I am likely forgetting others: Backwards compatibility: It was a mess on the PS3 with different launch models having different levels of compatibility. They later removed this functionality completely on the PS3. The PS4 had no backwards compatibility for PS3 instead you had to purchase (or subscribe) to play games in the cloud, games you may already own. Compared to Xbox which the Xbox One did not…

Most of these grievances are more about changes in the architectural direction than anything else. I don't see how using the Cell processor could be considered "anti-consumer". After all, we are talking about a time when consoles didn't generally use "off the self" processors - Nintendo had a customized PowerPC, too. Using more generic architectures is a quite recent development. > Paying developers either for exclus…

Maybe the cell processor was not anti-consumer but I also mentioned Sony being cocky which it very much was.

As far as Bungie, they were bought by Microsoft by the time Halo was made exclusive. I am not remembering any exclusive games from Rare before being bought by Microsoft?

You are right that Phil Spensor was the GM in 2014. That is a year after the Xbox One release ate, after many of the past mistakes were made. I don't know of examples of Microsoft engaging in many of these behaviors and in fact doing the opposite since he came in (existing contracts that was made before him being an exception). If I am wrong I would love examples, but I am not aware of them.

I am not necessarily saying that Microsoft is more or less anti consumer as a whole. But their gaming devision has done things (often in direct counter to what Sony is doing) that are more consumer friendly behaviors.

At the end of the day. It is Sony vs Microsoft here. The chance of us getting another serious contender in the gaming space is basically zero due to the cost, risk, and long term planning required.

Re: Microsoft completes $69B deal to buy Activision Blizzard

#54

Post by njovin »

eigenket wrote: post #29
izzydata wrote: post #20

It's strange to see some gamers praise this acquisition as if it will have any positive effect on some of the games they enjoy. In no world will Microsoft decreasing the competition going to be a good thing for consumers.

Mostly its because Activision/Blizzard is such an obviously shitty terrible company that any deal that sees cool IPs taken out of their hands is seen as a positive thing.

Which games has MS shown good stewardship of?

Halo is a shell of what it once was and has snubbed the players with false promises in recent iterations (couch co-op used to be a staple of Halo but they reneged on their promise to include it with the latest).

AFAIK they haven't had any good exclusive IP for Xbox in a while. They've had a few dynamite hits (ex. Sunset Overdrive) but haven't followed up on any that I'm aware of.

Re: Microsoft completes $69B deal to buy Activision Blizzard

#55

Post by TheRealDunkirk »

eigenket wrote: post #29
izzydata wrote: post #20

It's strange to see some gamers praise this acquisition as if it will have any positive effect on some of the games they enjoy. In no world will Microsoft decreasing the competition going to be a good thing for consumers.

Mostly its because Activision/Blizzard is such an obviously shitty terrible company that any deal that sees cool IPs taken out of their hands is seen as a positive thing.

I've argued about this deal on Twitter at length, and the prevailing sentiment of those who favor this acquisition comes down to one thing, and one thing only: getting more AAA games "for free" on Gamepass. Discovering why these people call this an "increase in competition" will be an exercise for future generations of intelligence researchers.

Re: Microsoft completes $69B deal to buy Activision Blizzard

#56

Post by dmonitor »

jokoon wrote: post #27
pjmlp wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the gaming culture isn't like the FOSS culture.

it should

mainstream gaming is closer to crack addict culture than anything else

once you start exploring gamedev, FGC, or retro gaming cultures, you find more interesting people that care about game mechanics. your average call of duty player would put up with the verification can system if it meant they keep getting their gaming fix.

Re: Microsoft completes $69B deal to buy Activision Blizzard

#57

Post by TheRealDunkirk »

dnissley wrote: post #49
izzydata wrote: post #20

It's strange to see some gamers praise this acquisition as if it will have any positive effect on some of the games they enjoy. In no world will Microsoft decreasing the competition going to be a good thing for consumers.

I've only ever seen gamers grouse about this acquisition fwiw

Then you haven't spent any time on Twitter.

Re: Microsoft completes $69B deal to buy Activision Blizzard

#58

Post by mynameisvlad »

njovin wrote: post #54
eigenket wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly its because Activision/Blizzard is such an obviously shitty terrible company that any deal that sees cool IPs taken out of their hands is seen as a positive thing.

Which games has MS shown good stewardship of? Halo is a shell of what it once was and has snubbed the players with false promises in recent iterations (couch co-op used to be a staple of Halo but they reneged on their promise to include it with the latest). AFAIK they haven't had any good exclusive IP for Xbox in a while. They've had a few dynamite hits (ex. Sunset Overdrive) but haven't followed up on any that I'm a…

Exclusive IPs aren’t and shouldn’t be a marker of good stewardship.

IMO, exclusives are one of the biggest issues with game systems nowadays, especially now that consoles are basically just reskinned and optimized computers.

Re: Microsoft completes $69B deal to buy Activision Blizzard

#59

Post by c0pium »

njovin wrote: post #54
eigenket wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly its because Activision/Blizzard is such an obviously shitty terrible company that any deal that sees cool IPs taken out of their hands is seen as a positive thing.

Which games has MS shown good stewardship of? Halo is a shell of what it once was and has snubbed the players with false promises in recent iterations (couch co-op used to be a staple of Halo but they reneged on their promise to include it with the latest). AFAIK they haven't had any good exclusive IP for Xbox in a while. They've had a few dynamite hits (ex. Sunset Overdrive) but haven't followed up on any that I'm a…

Age of Empires, for one. Thoughtful updates and remastered versions that aren’t priced like new games. Then new games that are actually worth the update. Can’t wait for that same ethos to be applied to Warcraft.

Re: Microsoft completes $69B deal to buy Activision Blizzard

#60

Post by AlexandrB »

TheRealDunkirk wrote: post #55
eigenket wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly its because Activision/Blizzard is such an obviously shitty terrible company that any deal that sees cool IPs taken out of their hands is seen as a positive thing.

I've argued about this deal on Twitter at length, and the prevailing sentiment of those who favor this acquisition comes down to one thing, and one thing only: getting more AAA games "for free" on Gamepass. Discovering why these people call this an "increase in competition" will be an exercise for future generations of intelligence researchers.

Can't wait for the wailing and gnashing of teeth when the free ride ends and Microsoft starts turning the screws on their (now captive) audience.
Post reply on HN