| Mummelmann said: It benefits gamers that massive conglomerates absorb more and more studios and publishers? You can have any opinion you want, but to see this merger as beneficial to gamers and that it will increase competition is quite the stretch. Let's not forget what happened when Activision and Blizzard merged, it's not like it kickstarted a series of some of the biggest and worst douche moves against gamers and old fans that we ever saw. Blizzard's fall from grace literally ties directly into merging with Activision. In my ideal world, most developers would be independent, or at the very least have complete creative control without publisher meddling and top-down control with maximum profits on behalf of boards being the sole purpose of the industry. I don't want Sony to acquire more studios with the intent of shutting out other gamers on other platforms either. |
Paying $70 for COD and Diablo IV doesn't benefit me in the slightest, I can tell you that. That is nine months worth of Gamepass ultimate right there.
And yes, I agree that if MS gets to be at the top they will stop being consumer friendly (and become just like Sony), but the thing is, even with Activision, they STILL won't be anywhere near at a monopoly level or even at the top of the gaming market so..
Besides, one thing that you guys haven't considered is that Sony will need to try harder. Who knows? they might start putting their first party titles on their subscription service 3 to 5 months after release, and they might even start offering free upgrades for their games, or start offering more games from their "classics" library, or start offering a "play anywhere" option where you can buy the game on your PS and get to play them on PC as well.
They might also realize that hiding the microtransactions in a $70 game until after the reviews embargo lifts is not okay.







