All I know is going into this generation my interest in the Series X was minimal... after Bethesda and Activision... I want one. So MS is gaining my interest.
|
i7-13700k |
|
Vengeance 32 gb |
|
RTX 4090 Ventus 3x E OC |
DroidKnight said:
This is what I had an issue with. This was a direct jab at Microsoft and Phil, not to mention you said they were happy to do it.
This is where I was at, but glad you are there as well. If this had been Nintendo making the purchase and then Sony and Xbox fanboys saying that Nintendo rewarded Activision's bad behavior, then that would have been equally as bad. But I expect the butt-hurts to make this connection going forward anyways and it will make for some lame distractions to actual discussion. |
Yes it would just be as hypocritical from Sony if they had bought Acti-Blizzard after making their 'concerns' known. Ditto for Nintendo, Apple, Google, Disney, Amazon, Netflix, Facebook, whatever.
However it was MS that is now in fact securing the stock value of Acti-Blizzard. Remember not long ago people were saying Kotick would get sacked when it starts hurting their stock value. What can Sony and MS do, ban the games or MT and DLC sales until Acti-Blizzard cleans house for real. That will hurt the stocks and will get the board to clean up. Instead now it seems the board kept Kotick around to close this deal at the highest value possible. So yes, it is in a round about way that MS is supporting to ongoing behavior at Acti-Blizzard.
But bring up butt-hurts and fanboys to distract from the consequences, intended or not, from this ill timed acquisition. There is no other way to look at it than, we know they were bad, but we would like to profit from their bad behavior while rewarding said bad behavior in the process. But we promise to do better in the long run. Actions speak louder than words, and this action speaks very loudly.
Azzanation said:
That CEO now has bigger bosses. He will need to earn his money now. His not even a drop in a pond to a company like MS. |
He doesn't need to earn anything, he has 4.6 million shares in a company worth 70 billion :p
SvennoJ said:
He doesn't need to earn anything, he has 4.6 million shares in a company worth 70 billion :p |
His not his own boss anymore which is the point. He may still run Activision/Blizzard however he now has a parent company to deal with.
The guys a multi billionaire so its not about the money its more about his effort he puts in moving forward. Either way, rumors suggest his on his way out after the official deal is done.
Last edited by Azzanation - on 18 January 2022
| Mnementh said: I doubt it is as simple. It is basically impossible at this point to gain a monopoly or even close in gaming. In movies for instance you need a team to make a somewhat good movie and more importantly: it will be very difficult to distribute it in a way that you get a lot of viewers and money. In gaming though you have lots of indies. It has never been easier to create a game - even as a single person. More importantly: it never has been easier to get your game to the consumer and their money in return. On PC you have Steam, GOG, itch.io, EGS. And always the option to simply sell it on your own website. Mobile is more difficult, as Google and Apple hold a firm grip on their respective ecosystem, but that doesn't seem to hinder game releases. And even on console more and more indies are able to publish. If some company in some sort of wonder acquires every game studio in the world today, then tomorrow a thousand new ones will exist. The most important and expensive part of this acquisition probably was King, but if MS would've only bought King from Activision, nobody on this forum would care. Although that probably makes the most money. |
Microsoft acquiring Activision Blizzard is a game changer. They might not have a monopoly now, but Microsoft can easily shift the industry towards streaming with all their IP, especially with the annual Call of Duty releasing on GamePass day and date.
| shikamaru317 said: Seamus got his 20 years in the making revenge on Activision today xD
|
Microsoft bought Activision. Xbox by still haven`t even made enough profit to buy even Zenimax by itself, let`s not pretend otherwise.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
| the-pi-guy said: They did. >They could make Gamepass $100 a month and I still would have saved money looking That's 7x more than it costs right now. |
I mean, unless he stops gaming a couple of years after Microsoft raises the price of GamePass, it will be a significantly more expensive hobby in the long run.
PotentHerbs said:
I mean, unless he stops gaming a couple of years after Microsoft raises the price of GamePass, it will be a significantly more expensive hobby in the long run. |
5 years ago I still spend about $1200 a year on games, and also $1200 a year on blu-rays.
Thanks to gamepass and xbox on pc (not needing an xbox anymore) and all the other deals, my spending is down to $400 a year on games.
Thanks to streaming and the movie and tv industry getting worse all the time my spending on movies/tv series is down to a few hundred a year.
I wonder who is filling in the gap? People that are buying DLC MTX and are subscribed to 5 different streaming services full time?
I'm not saying Sony's answer to Gamepass is DOA now but this move doesn't help things.
Sony needs to have historical/classic games on their service.
|
i7-13700k |
|
Vengeance 32 gb |
|
RTX 4090 Ventus 3x E OC |
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
Currently Online 
