PotentHerbs said:
Microsoft taking away Activision Blizzard games permanently from the PlayStation platform is absolutely a bad outcome. Promising to release Call of Duty on PlayStation platforms for the next ten years, if Microsoft doesn't try to renege those contracts like they did successfully with Indiana Jones, and failed to do so with Minecraft Dungeons, is not something I see as some benefit, since Microsoft won't be releasing CoD on PlayStation perpetually. As for the rest of Activision Blizzard's catalog, I expect that to be treated like Bethesda games, or how Microsoft planned to handle Sega if their M&A proposal was accepted; shortly after the acquisition closes, none of those games are going to be releasing on the PlayStation 5, outside of whatever is currently announced. When it comes to competing cloud services, and Nintendo, similar to the PlayStation platform, its only a temporary thing, and for all we know, they might only be doing it to appease regulators, especially with the information that has come out via unredacted court documents. The many gamers who oppose this deal are concerned about the industry being completely consolidated in a decades time. The variety and choice in the catalog of games we have access to as consumers, on our platform of choice, will slowly disappear as publishers start getting bought up, and gaming becomes four or five walled garden ecosystems/subscription services, similar to the streaming wars. Even if Microsoft is the strongest in this front, they aren't going to acquire every single publisher out there, and they will lose a ton of content. As for Sony, they highlighted one of their paths forward in terms of M&A, where they plan to spin off their financial arm, in order to make bigger investments in their entertainment division. Sony has seen the music industry consolidate, and took part in it, they have seen the movie industry consolidate, and attempted to take part in it via Fox, and now they see the gaming industry beginning to consolidate, from their direct competitor nonetheless. Would Nintendo really sit idly by if Sony decides to acquire a publisher like Square Enix? That's also not considering what Amazon, Tencent, or Netflix will do once the floodgates open. Whether or not you think mass consolidation is an irrational outcome to Microsoft's biggest acquisition ever is where we may differ. Personally, I doubt industry consolidation will ease up if Acti/Blizz is cleared, only accelerate. |
CoD of duty exclusivity never was at play at any time, see this post, even if it was a possibility to discuss it early on it never was undeniable, especially with Minecraft as the closest thing MS owns compare to CoD, now that we know a vast amount of details this concern is simply dead, not credible, and not logical.
Minecraft Dungeon was never under a multiplatform contract, so this is misrepresenting things quite a lot, it has been conceptualized, developed, and published under MS full ownership. They do what they want whit it and they willfully decided to go multiplatform. Maybe they discussed other possibilities at some point but that's only expected.
Indiana Jones, Disney agreed to add exclusivity close to their deal with Bethesda that was made under a different context without MS, this is still not an example that would show MS walking back on their word/contract.
for Diablo and Overwatch, we have not much info except that still exclusivity was not mentioned internally or with Blizzard regarding this acquisition. The next Diablo installment is likely 2034 at the earliest and the Overwatch sequel act as a replacement for the prior title making it very unlikely to go the exclusive route.
For the rest, smaller Ips and long-forgotten ones, yes I expect full exclusivity (except Guitar Hero, this would still make sense in a multiplatform format), but that's not unlike any other kind of exclusivity play so common in the industry, Jim Ryan himself stated there's nothing anti-competitive in that.
"The many gamers who oppose this deal are concerned about the industry being completely consolidated in a decades time. [...] Whether or not you think mass consolidation is an irrational outcome to Microsoft's biggest acquisition ever is where we may differ. Personally, I doubt industry consolidation will ease up if Acti/Blizz is cleared, only accelerate. "
But that's the thing, that's just a feeling, a belief that it would be so based on nothing more than gross generalization without looking at this deal in particular ins and outs. Since we know so many details about this deal it makes no sense to overlook those and rely on generalization. Furthermore, even if that's supposed to be true nothing points to this transaction as some kind of inception point to this, and that denying the transaction would somehow magically restore 'stability' in the market. This position to me is only one that roots for the status quo and/or fear changes. It focuses on might-be-bad aspects of a might-be future of a might-be tied to this transaction as an inception point and still overlooks any potential benefits in this scenario.
Also, I truly don't mind any actor attempting any acquisition unless it truly creates an undeniable SLC like MS buying Nintendo, at the end of the day acquisition is only about actors stepping up their game or trying new ventures. Yes I may lose some ease of access to some content and some companies might bring a vision that goes against what I wish and be bummed about it but that's it. Even if Google were to buy Take-Two, I would be pissed but not be against it, my wish is not supposed to be the be-all end-all VS one company's right to sell and another company's right to acquire.
Last edited by EpicRandy - on 13 July 2023
Essay Pro