Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

theverge.com

291–300 of 490 posts

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#291
post #3

The monopolization of every industry continues

Maybe so, but can you please stop posting unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments to HN? You've unfortunately been doing it repeatedly, and we're trying for something different here.

"Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That time is a 2017. The 2023 actually went faster, but the lap length changed in 2019 so its 7:44.9 time isn’t directly comparable. https://www.motortrend.com/news/2023-honda-civic-type-r-nurb...

And the 2023 was a stripped down version only available in Europe as well, that + the track change is why I looked up the 2017 numbers to compare properly.

Ha, I missed that. “Type R S” sold in left hand drive European markets to let them call it a production car lap time, as if anyone actually wants a Civic with no air conditioning.

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#293

What a joke. Because Microsoft is now failing as a gaming company the past 10 years, they’ve been allowed to swallow up competiton. Practically every game they’ve released or worked on the past 5 years has failed. Halo Infinite might literally be the biggest flop in entertainment history. Because of Azure they’re able to absorb these losses and continue to consolidate and eat the competiton. There’s tons of examples…

Because Sony is a tiny company, right? Half the reason that Microsoft has been buying game studios is because Sony has been buying game studios. Sony has even bought a game studio that Microsoft already bought and sold. Among others, Sony's bought: Psygnosis (Lemmings), Incognito (Twisted Metal), Zipper Interactive (SOCOM), Sigil (Everquest), Evolution (WRC, Motorstorm), Bungie (Destiny), Polyphony (Gran Turismo), Sa…

As someone said above “There is a difference in basically sponsoring the artistic abilities of a studio, versus buying one to shoulder out your competition”.

Bungee and maybe a few others are the exception, with the bungie purchase looking like a reaction to the activision purchase.

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#294

Someone please correct me if I'm way off the mark here: I assume the reason behind this purchase is to keep Windows relevant as a gaming platform. It looks as though Windows is becoming less relevant overall as a computing platform, and alternative platforms such as Steam Deck are beginning to pose a major threat to one of their major market demographics: Gaming.

Is that true? The game I developed for Steam Deck is actually the Windows application (it runs under Proton on Steam Deck). I suspect most developers are also doing this. No harm to Windows there. Maybe it's the Xbox getting left behind?

It's the Xbox. They've been on a huge campaign for exclusives for a while now.

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#295

What a joke. Because Microsoft is now failing as a gaming company the past 10 years, they’ve been allowed to swallow up competiton. Practically every game they’ve released or worked on the past 5 years has failed. Halo Infinite might literally be the biggest flop in entertainment history. Because of Azure they’re able to absorb these losses and continue to consolidate and eat the competiton. There’s tons of examples…

It’s funny that you mention Sony considering almost all of their first titles are from studios they’ve bought over the last 15 years. I guess it’s fine when Sony did it in the past to get ahead of the competition but now when Microsoft is doing it, it’s anticompetitive. The fact is the only way Microsoft becomes competitive again is for the industry to switch to streaming games. Thats why they’re buying all these stu…

They lost the console wars because they released shit consoles with shit games. They were totally fine during the Xbox 360 era when they made excellent games.

Who’s to say Microsoft won’t continue to subsidize the Xbox division? They’ve failed at every turn this past decade and yet continue to get a blank check.

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#296

What a joke. Because Microsoft is now failing as a gaming company the past 10 years, they’ve been allowed to swallow up competiton. Practically every game they’ve released or worked on the past 5 years has failed. Halo Infinite might literally be the biggest flop in entertainment history. Because of Azure they’re able to absorb these losses and continue to consolidate and eat the competiton. There’s tons of examples…

I completely get the point you are making but I wish I had a business that was "failing" like Xbox is. :P

You are right about the exclusives, they have not had anything that has really grabbed peoples attention long term for a long while. Halo Infinite felt like it was everywhere for about 2 weeks and then completely forgotten about. But others like God of War on PS have had legs for years.

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#297
The real issue is Sony has many exclusives which gives Microsoft a better case (despite the judge saying it's NOT about Sony).

It certainly harms consumers, so I don't see how the court still approved this especially with the judge's comment against the comparison to Sony. Almost all mergers of this size harm consumers, the fact that it's allowed by default is the crucial issue.

If the FTC still had a spine they would go after all of these kinds of exclusive deals - and not just limited to games.

The film industry was famously broken up such that the production companies couldn't own theaters yet in 2023 that rule (if it still exists) is so weak that most production companies have their streaming service and aggressively pressure theaters into exclusivity Windows.

At the end of the day this only strengthens the trend to PC gaming which only benefits Microsoft and can only hurt Sony. It would only be a minor surprise if Sony joined the Proton/WINE effort with Valve to get around Microsoft exclusives. (Which does help consumers but in a 3D chess kind of way).

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#299
post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The portability doesn’t matter. Nintendo operates in a different market segment because of the hardware specs, and games they support. If you want to play the latest Call of Duty, Halo, God of War, Elden Ring… then Sony and Microsoft are competing for your business (sometimes with exclusive contracts), Nintendo is not. Their consoles wouldn’t be able to support those games.

Call of Duty will be available for Switch under Microsoft. Halo and God of War are platform exclusives. But so are Tears of the Kingdom and various Mario titles. Elden Ring is the only game listed that's not available for Switch but is on both others. Even then, there are a ton of games that are available across all platforms, including some AAA ones: Mortal Kombat 11 The Witcher 3 Assassins's Creed (multiple) Skyrim…

The Switch runs plenty of previous generation games, because it’s capable of supporting them. The Switch wouldn’t support MW 2, and Microsoft have not announced any plans to release that game, or any upcoming CoD game on it.

The reason Microsoft and Sony sign exclusive deal is mostly the keep games off each others platforms. Graphics-intensive “AAA” games aren’t going to run on the switch. Nintendo undeniably operates in a distinct segment, even if it’s capable of supporting some limited amount of overlap with the other vendors.

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#300
post #172

This is weird. The judge says that because there won’t be any anticompetitive effects in the next 10 years (because MS made a pinky promise), this merger is fine? What about after those 10 years? What about anything not Call of Duty?

10 years is also nothing in game development. Games now can take up to 7 years from conception to release, and then there is post release content. Based on the “10 years”, that would mean like what, 1 game out of each series would be cross platform? And for Sony, they would need to start developing a competent competitor to Call of Duty immediately. Or Sony could just buy EA and create a Titanfall 3 since I guess it’…

There has been a major Call of Duty release 19 of the last 20 years, they only missed 2004 between the original in 2003 and 2 in 2005. 10 year commitment means 10 CoD games for Sony.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_of_Duty

Let’s hope for Sony, and the sake of growth and creativity that by 2033, we are moving past CoD onto newer, fresher, better games.

Post reply on HN