this post was submitted on 13 Oct 2023
70 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37719 readers
350 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

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

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
alyaza@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@beehaw.org
gyrfalcon@beehaw.org
rs5th@beehaw.org
SemioticStandard@beehaw.org
TheRtRevKaiser@kbin.social
Los@beehaw.org
coldredlight@beehaw.org
remington@beehaw.org
70
Microsoft completes Activision Blizzard acquisition, Call of Duty now part of Xbox (www.theverge.com)
submitted 1 year ago by throws_lemy@lemmy.nz to c/technology@beehaw.org
18 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com 33 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I'm not sure why people are expecting Microsoft to act altruistically in this merger. They're a publicly traded company that exists to create profit for their shareholders, and they're not going to do a single thing that won't increase their profits.

Mergers like this are always bad for the consumer, and the FTC is betraying the citizens by letting it happen.

[–] pb7280@lemmy.fucs.io 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Mergers like this are always bad for the consumer

This is not true. Horizontal mergers are always bad for the consumer. Vertical mergers, like this one, can either be good or bad or neither. In many other cases they have been a net benefit to consumers and actually increased competition

No one is expecting Microsoft to act altruistically. We are expecting them to rake in more cash, especially from King, and invest that cash in games, gamepass, and actual competition to Sony and Nintendo. We are expecting them to make smart business decisions and, SHOCKER, there are smart business decisions available to them that are also beneficial to consumers

No company is your friend. But a smart company finds ways to make money off you while still leaving you happy and content after

[–] Stillhart@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

No company is your friend. But a smart company finds ways to make money off you while still leaving you happy and content after

Exactly. If this weren't the case, companies wouldn't exist in the first place.

That said, MS has historically been pretty anti-competitive and monopolistic so I don't see any reason to expect that to change. But I think that even at their worst, this isn't going to be as bad as people are making it out to be. Playstation won't go away because of this. Playstation is already worse than Xbox in almost every way, they're just coasting right now. People will point to this merger as a turning point for PS but I think that ignores where PS is already at.

[–] ono@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

Activision Blizzard is such an awful company that I stopped playing their games, for ethical reasons. I'm no fan of Microsoft or consolidation, but at least they don't have a habit of supporting human rights abuses. This acqisition has me considering playing (ex-)Blizzard games again.

Vertical mergers, like this one, can either be good

Do you have any examples?

[–] ultratiem@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m sorry there were people expecting Microsoft to act altruistically??

[–] thepianistfroggollum@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 1 year ago

Yes? At the time of my comment all of the other comments were people hoping it would be a good thing.

[–] dan@upvote.au 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Mergers like this are always bad for the consumer

Microsoft's acquisitions of Github and LinkedIn both worked out pretty well.

Github actually has more free features now than it did before the Microsoft acquisition - they made some paid features free (like the ability to have private repos) and added a lot of new free features (like Github Actions which is built on Azure), without removing or paywalling any existing free features. Github likely wouldn't have been able to afford that investment without Microsoft.

[–] taanegl@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They also use GitHub to hover up code and resell it as AI... and it's only a question of time before they do a rugpull.

Make no mistake, they bought both for access to the data and use it daily to upend other competitors.

Remember: embrace, expand, extinguish...

[–] dan@upvote.au 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They also use GitHub to hover up code and resell it as AI

Microsoft's not the only company doing this. Pretty much all code-focused AI models are based on Github data.

Remember: embrace, expand, extinguish...

This may have been common in the 90s, but I'm not sure it's still relevant. Do you have any examples of Microsoft doing this in the past 10 years?

[–] Chinzon@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

Regardless at the end of the day microsoft is a business. By that fact alone their decisions are dependent on what is best for the company. If and when this deviates from what is best for the consumers, we will learn to regret the acquisition

[–] Stillhart@lemm.ee 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not a fan of market consolidation. It's bad for the consumer at the end of the day.

But if I were to look for a silver lining: 1 More quality Gamepass content and 2 Maybe MS can save Blizzard from itself.

[–] abir_vandergriff@beehaw.org 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I look forward to 5-10 years from now when the people who were kids now start pointing to this acquisition as the negative "turning point" for Blizzard because they liked Overwatch 2.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] electromage@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe they can make WoW expansions free with a subscription now, or make it all part of Xbox Game Pass?

[–] SuiXi3D@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

WoW being included with a GamePass sub (similar to Fallout 76 or ESO) would be great, but don’t expect any expansions to be included.

[–] terminhell@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I wonder if MS is more interested in the Activision side. MW/King etc. I think blizzard is just a baggage addon at this point.

[–] dudewitbow@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Im of the boat that believes innorder to boost gamepass subscription numbers for shareholders, WoW subs will eventually merge into gamepass

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 2 points 1 year ago

🤖 I'm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:

Click here to see the summaryMicrosoft has finalized its $68.7 billion deal to acquire Activision Blizzard, the publisher of Call of Duty, World of Warcraft, and Diablo.

The acquisition required 20 months of battles with regulators in the UK and US, but Microsoft has closed its Activision Blizzard deal after defeating the Federal Trade Commission in a US federal court and restructuring the deal to appease the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) in the UK.

“As one team, we’ll learn, innovate, and continue to deliver on our promise to bring the joy and community of gaming to more people.

“Today we start the work to bring beloved Activision, Blizzard, and King franchises to Game Pass and other platforms,” says Spencer.

Activision Blizzard made it clear earlier this week that Modern Warfare 3 and Diablo IV won’t be coming to Xbox Game Pass this year, though.

After the FTC then failed to secure a preliminary injunction to block Microsoft from finalizing its Activision Blizzard acquisition, the CMA and Microsoft instantly agreed to pause their legal battles for a remedy in the UK and eventually negotiated an agreement over cloud gaming rights.

Saved 63% of original text.

[–] GreenMario@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

MS knows that everyone is gonna have their own Sub service just like how Netflix spawned all the Hulus and Disney+s., and it's already started with EA and Ubisoft. To stay relevant they need to own the content, not just rent.

To keep GP relevant they need to cater to all types of gamers. You need RPGs, shooters, indies, classics, strategys, casuals, sims etc. "Something for everyone".

I'ma be honest, I'll consider this a win if Phil does actually get Raven on Hexen 3 like he kinda hinted at. Let's get Warcraft 4 or Prototype 3, some new Tony Hawk. There are a lot of dead IPs that can use a comeback that isn't just a remaster. Maybe they can go back and fix Warcraft 3 and make an Xbox port so that I can lay back on my couch and play that like I have done with AoE2.

If they decide to keep things business as usual it's gonna suck.