I have conflicting feelings about this whole thing. On one hand, I'm really sick of all the corporate katamari always going on and it's nice to see some pushback while on the other, I'd really...
I have conflicting feelings about this whole thing. On one hand, I'm really sick of all the corporate katamari always going on and it's nice to see some pushback while on the other, I'd really like to see Kotick leave the industry.
Ultimately, I rarely ever play AAA games anymore, and I honestly can't even remember the last Actiblizzion game I played.
When I think about the corporate consolidation this purchase will create, I completely understand that there are good legal reasons to prevent this from happening without further examination. As a...
When I think about the corporate consolidation this purchase will create, I completely understand that there are good legal reasons to prevent this from happening without further examination.
As a gamer, I would love for Blizzard IPs to be under a company that treats their properties well.
Kotick is rich and will remain rich regardless of this outcome.
With the golden parachute it's getting, I feel it's worse in a way. Yeah he's gone but we're commending him for "what he did". It should be that he has to leave and leave all his money behind.
I'd really like to see Kotick leave the industry
With the golden parachute it's getting, I feel it's worse in a way. Yeah he's gone but we're commending him for "what he did".
It should be that he has to leave and leave all his money behind.
They voted last year to give all the executives a golden parachute. I think I remember reading that Bobby's is a measly 15 million if Microsoft tries to release him without cause. That's pennies...
They voted last year to give all the executives a golden parachute. I think I remember reading that Bobby's is a measly 15 million if Microsoft tries to release him without cause. That's pennies compared to the half a billion he's going to get in stock if the merger goes through.
I would love to hear the legalese mental gymnastics required to spin how reducing the number of potential competitors to Microsoft, Valve, Epic, EA, Sony, and Nintendo helps bring more choice....
“Accelerating the legal process in the US will ultimately bring more choice and competition to the gaming market,” Microsoft spokesperson David Cuddy said in a statement
I would love to hear the legalese mental gymnastics required to spin how reducing the number of potential competitors to Microsoft, Valve, Epic, EA, Sony, and Nintendo helps bring more choice.
"Microsoft purchases and rebrands Epic as XBox Games Marketplace, and Fortnite as 'Minecraft 2'" doesn't seem a good way to do that, and almost certainly would raise flags...and Epic is valued at less than half of Actiblizz, around 32 billion.
EA is valued around 40 billion. Heck, they could likely pick up Ubisoft for less than 10 billion.
The theory is as follows: Microsoft is 3rd place in the market, and has been for well over a decade. buying a huge 3rd party will majorly bolster their catalog of games, and drive exclusives to...
The theory is as follows:
Microsoft is 3rd place in the market, and has been for well over a decade.
buying a huge 3rd party will majorly bolster their catalog of games, and drive exclusives to their platform.
this makes them catch up or even surpass sony in market share, pushing pressure on sony to compete in areas where it lacks that exclusivity.
This leads to Sony either delivering more in those genres (in this case, FPSs) or acquiring a studio and wrangling their talent to compete.
all MS games, unlike Sony, come to PC. and MS long since abandoned its attempt to try and become the exclusive windows store. So Valve isn't exactly that strongly affected by any of this.
Activision had almost zero presence on Nintendo this generation, so Nintendo isnt losing much. And has been operating in its own space for a while now.
And with Microsoft bringing games to the switch it should show they care less about console exclusivity and more about subscription and software sales.
And with Microsoft bringing games to the switch it should show they care less about console exclusivity and more about subscription and software sales.
Yep, Microsoft is just trying to get anyone to play their games. Sony is slowly putting their games on PC but aren't in a rush to put their new exclusives on Steam. However, I don't think...
Yep, Microsoft is just trying to get anyone to play their games. Sony is slowly putting their games on PC but aren't in a rush to put their new exclusives on Steam.
However, I don't think Microsoft gaining Blizzard will help them in the short term. They've said they won't make Call of Duty an Xbox/PC exclusive (for potentially a decade?). I imagine Playstation gamers still make up a huge portion of microtransaction sales
That's a name I haven't heard in a while. I'm sure CoD is still relevant but I also wouldn't be surprised if they did the usual Microsoft thing of acquiring a company 10 years after it stops being...
Call of Duty
That's a name I haven't heard in a while.
I'm sure CoD is still relevant but I also wouldn't be surprised if they did the usual Microsoft thing of acquiring a company 10 years after it stops being relevant.
I keep seeing headlines saying "so and so game sells the most in it's series" and I always wonder how much it is to do with the fact that there are just many more gamers now then there was in the...
I keep seeing headlines saying "so and so game sells the most in it's series" and I always wonder how much it is to do with the fact that there are just many more gamers now then there was in the past. Games that are critically panned and seen as mediocre by large sets of people (the recent Pokemon games are a good example.)
Not just because gaming is getting more and more popular in general, but there's also just so many more people in the world, year after year aging into the gaming demographic. There are over 100 million new people born every year, at least a tiny percentage of them probably grow up to be gamers right?
I think also MW2 (2022) is a special circumstance. MW2 (2009) was such a renouned game that I think people were hoping MW2 (2022) would give some sort of nostalgia. The campaign had characters...
I think also MW2 (2022) is a special circumstance. MW2 (2009) was such a renouned game that I think people were hoping MW2 (2022) would give some sort of nostalgia. The campaign had characters like Ghost. I wouldn't be surprised if the next COD release has slower sales
Crazy. 15 years or so ago it already felt like they were trying to milk a dying series. I assumed it peaked at MW2 and then sort of just sizzled out. Had no idea it's still alive.
Crazy. 15 years or so ago it already felt like they were trying to milk a dying series. I assumed it peaked at MW2 and then sort of just sizzled out.
Love it. Keep doing so. Look, I love Microsoft's turnaround this generation with Game Pass. And I want to see Activision-Blizzard in better hands. But I do not believe in corporate consolidation....
Love it. Keep doing so. Look, I love Microsoft's turnaround this generation with Game Pass. And I want to see Activision-Blizzard in better hands. But I do not believe in corporate consolidation. It used to be, companies existed for a form-fit purpose locally. We've seen very recently a big corporation gobbling up another (T-Mobile and Sprint) and it destroying price choice and competition for customers. There's a chance to bring back the old trust-busting.
I have conflicting feelings about this whole thing. On one hand, I'm really sick of all the corporate katamari always going on and it's nice to see some pushback while on the other, I'd really like to see Kotick leave the industry.
Ultimately, I rarely ever play AAA games anymore, and I honestly can't even remember the last Actiblizzion game I played.
When I think about the corporate consolidation this purchase will create, I completely understand that there are good legal reasons to prevent this from happening without further examination.
As a gamer, I would love for Blizzard IPs to be under a company that treats their properties well.
Kotick is rich and will remain rich regardless of this outcome.
Same, ultimately I'd rather see microsoft in charge of their IP's and Kotick flushed. Maybe microsoft could actually make blizzard less of a shithole.
With the golden parachute it's getting, I feel it's worse in a way. Yeah he's gone but we're commending him for "what he did".
It should be that he has to leave and leave all his money behind.
Iirc if he's fired a certain amount of time after acquisition he doesn't get one, but its been a long time since I read that.
They voted last year to give all the executives a golden parachute. I think I remember reading that Bobby's is a measly 15 million if Microsoft tries to release him without cause. That's pennies compared to the half a billion he's going to get in stock if the merger goes through.
I would love to hear the legalese mental gymnastics required to spin how reducing the number of potential competitors to Microsoft, Valve, Epic, EA, Sony, and Nintendo helps bring more choice.
"Microsoft purchases and rebrands Epic as XBox Games Marketplace, and Fortnite as 'Minecraft 2'" doesn't seem a good way to do that, and almost certainly would raise flags...and Epic is valued at less than half of Actiblizz, around 32 billion.
EA is valued around 40 billion. Heck, they could likely pick up Ubisoft for less than 10 billion.
The theory is as follows:
And with Microsoft bringing games to the switch it should show they care less about console exclusivity and more about subscription and software sales.
Yep, Microsoft is just trying to get anyone to play their games. Sony is slowly putting their games on PC but aren't in a rush to put their new exclusives on Steam.
However, I don't think Microsoft gaining Blizzard will help them in the short term. They've said they won't make Call of Duty an Xbox/PC exclusive (for potentially a decade?). I imagine Playstation gamers still make up a huge portion of microtransaction sales
That's a name I haven't heard in a while.
I'm sure CoD is still relevant but I also wouldn't be surprised if they did the usual Microsoft thing of acquiring a company 10 years after it stops being relevant.
I keep seeing headlines saying "so and so game sells the most in it's series" and I always wonder how much it is to do with the fact that there are just many more gamers now then there was in the past. Games that are critically panned and seen as mediocre by large sets of people (the recent Pokemon games are a good example.)
Not just because gaming is getting more and more popular in general, but there's also just so many more people in the world, year after year aging into the gaming demographic. There are over 100 million new people born every year, at least a tiny percentage of them probably grow up to be gamers right?
I think also MW2 (2022) is a special circumstance. MW2 (2009) was such a renouned game that I think people were hoping MW2 (2022) would give some sort of nostalgia. The campaign had characters like Ghost. I wouldn't be surprised if the next COD release has slower sales
Crazy. 15 years or so ago it already felt like they were trying to milk a dying series. I assumed it peaked at MW2 and then sort of just sizzled out.
Had no idea it's still alive.
Love it. Keep doing so. Look, I love Microsoft's turnaround this generation with Game Pass. And I want to see Activision-Blizzard in better hands. But I do not believe in corporate consolidation. It used to be, companies existed for a form-fit purpose locally. We've seen very recently a big corporation gobbling up another (T-Mobile and Sprint) and it destroying price choice and competition for customers. There's a chance to bring back the old trust-busting.
Again? I thought this has already happened like twice