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

481–490 of 590 posts

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

#481

Post by gigatexal »

deadmutex wrote: post #440
gigatexal wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The SC2 professional scene is doing really well I think. Lots of games being played at the highest levels. And tons of content for it on YouTube with some of the best play by play commentators out there. I really enjoy that. What deep pocketed Microsoft could do is really up the ante and make the prize money for tournaments of say Quake (they own ID) or SC2 and others really high and attract even more buzz etc etc. I…

> The SC2 professional scene is doing really well I think I could easily claim the opposite. There's very little to no mention of SC2 for Blizzcon '23 as well.

That sucks. I didn’t know that.

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

#482

Post by pjmlp »

manuelabeledo wrote: post #360
pjmlp wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, likewise no one should say the same about OEMs doing deals with Microsoft about pre-installed Windows, or researchers with NVidia. Those mean companies.

You are comparing a 70%-30% market share split in consoles, to a virtually 100% for Microsoft in OEM PC sales, and a >85% for Nvidia in AI and research oriented GPUs [0] Microsoft also controls ~95% of the PC gaming market, which makes up ~40% of the total video game market [1]. So remind me again, which studios were bullied by Sony to give up access to the majority of the market, in exchange for nothing? [0] https:/…

Moving goalposts.

First they are to blame, then they are poor fellows without an option.

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

#483

Post by seabird »

rollcat wrote: post #369

I keep my fingers crossed for the revival of the StarCraft franchise. I grew up with the game, and it's kinda sad to see the current state of SC2: old bugs, new bugs, community trying to take over the processes but having a very bumpy ride, opaque decision making (de-facto spokespersons/community figures under muddy NDAs), and unfortunately all our 2010 fears (no local/LAN play!) coming true, when server outages are…

I love RTS games, but they're probably never going to achieve the level of success they have in the past. You can still make them, but like arena shooters, movement shooters, and fighting games, they really are from a different era that modern players struggle to come to terms with, and it's hard to justify risking putting a lot of money behind them. It's a shame, because I love all of these genres, but I wouldn't bet the farm on them.

There's always a chance and I hold onto hope. Baldur's Gate 3 is a CRPG with a budget way beyond what I would ever be comfortable risking on a genre that has been fairly niche in the overall video game landscape for 15+ years, and it paid off massively. However, being realistic, BG3 is a game that is strong regardless of your skill level and the other genres I've mentioned struggle with that.

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

#484

Post by tacocataco »

j4_hnews wrote: post #395
rollcat wrote: post #369

I keep my fingers crossed for the revival of the StarCraft franchise. I grew up with the game, and it's kinda sad to see the current state of SC2: old bugs, new bugs, community trying to take over the processes but having a very bumpy ride, opaque decision making (de-facto spokespersons/community figures under muddy NDAs), and unfortunately all our 2010 fears (no local/LAN play!) coming true, when server outages are…

I rediscovered Brood War during Covid (free to play). 99% of matchups I lost. But there was one 4+ hour 1v1 marathon on a huge map. Lost that one too but what an incredible game. So many comebacks on both sides. So close. Matching skills is key to a GG.

Brood war path finding can be rough to adjust to, even if you played SC2.

I wish star craft had a "scatter" button to space out your units like command and conquer has (its been a decade but I think the button is X). Maybe even some formation options to avoid everyone packing in a tight ball where the move command is issued. AOE is so lethal in SC I think it hurts the gameplay.

Its a safety issue as well. Pro terrans often have wrist issues from splitting their units. With the other races it isn't as crucial, but still an issue.

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

#485

Post by tacocataco »

chrisco255 wrote: post #448
rollcat wrote: post #369

I keep my fingers crossed for the revival of the StarCraft franchise. I grew up with the game, and it's kinda sad to see the current state of SC2: old bugs, new bugs, community trying to take over the processes but having a very bumpy ride, opaque decision making (de-facto spokespersons/community figures under muddy NDAs), and unfortunately all our 2010 fears (no local/LAN play!) coming true, when server outages are…

Agreed, an SC3 would be potentially awesome. And I've always thought it would be interesting if they built a StarCraft MMO.

That Starcraft ghost seemed like a cool concept.

Also I wonder why "World of starcraft" never happened. Terran would play like kinda like Planetside, zerg could play like the alien team in Natural Selection, protoss like the predator in the AVP games.

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

#486

Post by tacocataco »

lapetitejort wrote: post #315
enumjorge wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the parent comment is referring to PS5's success, but rather things like their recent significant price increases[0] to their PS Plus service, which is required for multiplayer for a lot of their games. [0] https://www.ign.com/articles/sony-raises-price-of-playstatio...

Just a reminder of who is ultimately responsible for having to pay for multiplayer in the first place: Microsoft. The PC remains the final holdout for for free multiplayer. Since Microsoft owns a sizable portion of the PC tech stack, that may not last forever.

Microsoft could have followed the PC gaming blueprint if they didn't want to pay for the multi-player services.

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

#488

Post by tacocataco »

kridsdale3 wrote: post #358
TerrifiedMouse wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like MS has a good track record with improving studios they acquire ... Studios under them seem to succeed despite them not because of them.

MSFT as an employer and work environment has industry standard (very good) ESG / DEI stuff, and work life balance is apparently excellent. Contrast with Activision's stewardship of grinding their workers in to bloody dust, and sprinkling sexual abuse on top. Kotic has to go. Before this acquisition became a news story the news was full of employee lawsuits and California itself initiating action against the awful man…

The sexual abuse scandal is what finally broke me free from World of War craft. I had been playing WoW since the invite only beta.

My gaming backlog is still insanely huge and I won't be going back.

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

#489

Post by tacocataco »

deafpolygon wrote: post #67
dmonitor wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

kpop culture is closer to "crack addict culture" than mainstream gaming.

People should enjoy doing what they like so long as they don't hurt themselves or others

We all die at the end of our lives, so do what you love.

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

#490

Post by tacocataco »

jonhohle wrote: post #396
kridsdale3 wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm paying now. Like $15/mo or so. And I download $300/mo worth of titles. So what's the concern?

That’s called a bait-and-switch. Once physical games are no longer a thing, I would expect to see the GamePass library shrink, the subscription get more expensive, or some other unanticipated switch that drives up the cost. Companies don’t operate at a loss[0] for the benefit of their customers. They’re conditioning players to later extract more value later. 0 - https://www.thegamer.com/microsoft-xbox-game-pass-negat…

Legislation can prevent these things from happening.

That said, your scenario is probably more likely without a massive cultural shift or the introduction of Ranked choice voting.

Post reply on HN