By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Where do you stand on Microsoft buying Activision/Blizzard?

 

For or against the acquisition?

For 57 43.85%
 
Against 46 35.38%
 
Neutral 27 20.77%
 
Total:130
Ultr said:

deep pockets never make for better games, so I am completely against it. MS can start managing their IPs and the studios they have already, they dont have to fk up more

What devs have they fk up lately?. And if we are going from things years ago under different leadership we might as well include all the devs/companys Sony fk'd up.



Around the Network
zero129 said:
Zkuq said:

I'm not going to go into the legal side or the business side of things here. My personal opinion, however, is very strongly against the acquisition. Consolidation of the industry is probably not a beneficial thing for competition, period. This might have some short-term benefits e.g. in the form of strengthening GamePass, but in the long term, I'm more worried. The worst-case scenario is that this swings the balance in a way that's unrecovarable for Sony. I don't think this is going to go that far, especially if MIcrosoft does keep Call of Duty on Sony's consoles for a long time, but it's still worrying.

So pretty much your only worried about this deal because of PlayStation. Well Sony didnt care about Nintendo or Sega when they entered the console market and Ms has said they will use CoD like Minecraft. No harm in that. Sony would never allow such a thing when they where trying to wipe out Nintendo in the past. This deal is good for workers, its good for the staff that work at actiblizzard only person who this deal is not good for is Sony as its going to give them competition something they hate as they are used to being the "Rich" Company in the video game market.

I'm worried about competition. Nintendo is still here, and just for the record, I think losing Sega as a competitor in the console hardware market was a loss. I also don't see Microsoft as a trustworthy company (not that Microsoft is alone in this, mind you), and I trust that given the chance, Microsoft will eventually abuse this in some manner that's bad for gamers. And just for the record, I've grown to dislike Sony quite a bit, and if anything, I welcome strong competition against Sony, but this Activision Blizzard deal is quite big for my taste - not that I'm a fan of other acquisitions either, mind you, if they hurt the competition.



Kyuu said:

I waver between netural and against it. First of all, it's naive if not disingenuous to say it's only bad for Sony:

1. An acquisition of this magnitide is guaranteed to push Sony (and others) to step up their acquisition plans, which could affect Nintendo consoles in addition to Xbox and to some extent PC. Sony is more traditional than Microsoft and is more likely to make exclusives.

2. Unless the above happens and Sony gobbles up a publisher or two, it will be harder for MS to acquire a large number of smaller developers and publishers.

3. This "nice" Microsoft is temporary and directly tied to their "only 30% marketshare, next to Sony's 70%!!!". GamePass as I and many others predicted will increase in price, and lots of the future games people assume will be there on day 1 in fact won't be. And to any GamePass user who isn't a fan of CoD and AB games, a GamePass price hike caused by inclusion of CoD is definitely a negative. A higher entry price is worse value to a segment of people.

The deal has some obvious positives though:

1. GamePass day 1 is a good thing. The future, no matter how evil I think Microsoft are, is guesswork after all.

2. It hints to a positive change in the toxic workplace.

3. Promises support for Nintendo platforms.

4. Makes Sony less reliant on videos games I consider garbage, and hopefully forces them to innovate and diversify their 1st party lineup.

Sony is the only company making arguments against this deal so I don't think saying so is naive or disingenuous. If any other actors resent this deal they have yet to manifest themselves publicly and to regulators.

If Nintendo themselves believed the scenario you highlighted as anything serious or likely they would say so to the regulators and won't be making deal with MS improving their chance of success with the deal. 

Sony might very well acquire more studios because of it or buy studios they already planned to we would never know but Microsoft can't be blocked by what Sony might plan to do or not do.

The nice attitude from ms is not because they are behind in console sales, it is because they're in front of subscription base game delivery and don't see Sony's (and others') existence as a threat but as an actor that adds to the potential of the overall market. And this is also true for Sony if MS can bring more consumer to the market some will certainly end up playing Sony games and even some will use the cheaper way of playing MS propose to also buy a PS5+.

As for the pricing, to have read many discussion around it I could guarantee you no one here believe Microsoft will ever increase the price. The best I can hope is that the price won't increase as long as Microsoft heavily focuses on growth but that has an end. 

As for removing the day 1 release to GP, there is 0 indication this will happen short, medium, or long term. If the argument is anything is possible then yeah but 99% sure Sony will add a day 1 release to their subscription way before MS even thinks of stopping it.

Also, the transaction would be done with cash on hand as an exchange for the equivalent value in assets, MS may well be increasing the price of their subs pricing afterward but doubt this transaction will be the culprit though, as inflation and a shift of focus from growth to sustain and growth are more like it. Also, keep in mind that Gamepass is still at the same price as in 2017 when it was released. With only a 2% yearly inflation it already makes GamePass $1.02 cheaper than at release and so a 1-dollar potential increase could be solely attributed to it.

Last edited by EpicRandy - on 15 December 2022

Ode to a masterpiece

2023 so much great game to play, somehow I know I must walk that alley, but don't you feel in disarray, I'll always come back to you Stardew Valley.

Zkuq said:
zero129 said:

So pretty much your only worried about this deal because of PlayStation. Well Sony didnt care about Nintendo or Sega when they entered the console market and Ms has said they will use CoD like Minecraft. No harm in that. Sony would never allow such a thing when they where trying to wipe out Nintendo in the past. This deal is good for workers, its good for the staff that work at actiblizzard only person who this deal is not good for is Sony as its going to give them competition something they hate as they are used to being the "Rich" Company in the video game market.

I'm worried about competition. Nintendo is still here, and just for the record, I think losing Sega as a competitor in the console hardware market was a loss. I also don't see Microsoft as a trustworthy company (not that Microsoft is alone in this, mind you), and I trust that given the chance, Microsoft will eventually abuse this in some manner that's bad for gamers. And just for the record, I've grown to dislike Sony quite a bit, and if anything, I welcome strong competition against Sony, but this Activision Blizzard deal is quite big for my taste - not that I'm a fan of other acquisitions either, mind you, if they hurt the competition.

Gabe Newell certainly disagree on your statement of MS' trustworthiness. For Nintendo, they themselves have helped MS out by accepting the CoD 10 year deal. But that said I totally understand and respect your opinion even if I don't share it.



Ode to a masterpiece

2023 so much great game to play, somehow I know I must walk that alley, but don't you feel in disarray, I'll always come back to you Stardew Valley.

EpicRandy said:
Zkuq said:

I'm worried about competition. Nintendo is still here, and just for the record, I think losing Sega as a competitor in the console hardware market was a loss. I also don't see Microsoft as a trustworthy company (not that Microsoft is alone in this, mind you), and I trust that given the chance, Microsoft will eventually abuse this in some manner that's bad for gamers. And just for the record, I've grown to dislike Sony quite a bit, and if anything, I welcome strong competition against Sony, but this Activision Blizzard deal is quite big for my taste - not that I'm a fan of other acquisitions either, mind you, if they hurt the competition.

Gabe Newell certainly disagree on your statement of MS' trustworthiness. For Nintendo, they themselves have helped MS out by accepting the CoD 10 year deal. But that said I totally understand and respect your opinion even if I don't share it.

Gabe is in a different position though. Steam has been doing very well even without Call of Duty, so clearly there's not that much threat against Steam even if Call of Duty strayed away from Steam again. Additionally, Microsoft has demonstrated its willingness to put its games on Steam for years now, probably because that's where the money's at on PC. That is, Gabe has good reason to believe that Microsoft is actually interested in releasing its games on Steam, and even if they weren't, Steam would still do just fine. He can definitely afford to be trusting. In the console market however, the belief seems to be that exclusives matter a lot, and I'm sure both Microsoft and Sony are looking further than just the next ten years.



Around the Network

While diluting my argument to the basic, I can't accept the merger of a big AAA publisher resulting in the shift and consolidation of a major corp. Whether anyone thinks the positives will outweight the bad, it is to you to value this deal on a short-term or long-term perspective.

Anywoo, the mismanagement stories of studios like The Initiative and the complete abandonment of their flagship series Halo in the hands of 345 Industries tell me that in some way, probably not now but in some way later .... They'll mess it up



Switch Friend Code : 3905-6122-2909 

I'm neutral in my point of view of it.

I have access to all platforms so it doesnt really affect me much.

I see one pro and one con though.


Pro - Blizzard games could potentially come out on Steam but then again Minecraft is still non-store exclusive on PC.

Con - There's a chance mismanagement could happen like Rareware 2 decades ago but its too far early to see what will happen now, we'll know in a few years with Bethesda.


Either ways, doesnt matter to me - I already have Activision/Blizzard games across Playstation, Xbox, Nintendo and PC platforms already, so it helps not being restricted to investing in one platform exclusively.



    

Basil's YouTube Channel


                    

I'm all for it! It'll likely mean Crash 4 gets released on Steam rather than being exclusive to battle.net. I want to play Crash 4 so it'd be a great acquisition as far as I'm concerned!



Ka-pi96 said:

I'm all for it! It'll likely mean Crash 4 gets released on Steam rather than being exclusive to battle.net. I want to play Crash 4 so it'd be a great acquisition as far as I'm concerned!

That released on Steam back in October.



Ka-pi96 said:

I'm all for it! It'll likely mean Crash 4 gets released on Steam rather than being exclusive to battle.net. I want to play Crash 4 so it'd be a great acquisition as far as I'm concerned!

You are like 2 months late.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/1378990/Crash_Bandicoot_4_Its_About_Time/

Though I guess I shouldnt be surprised, no one here posts news about stuff like that here anymore lol.

Last edited by BasilZero - on 15 December 2022

    

Basil's YouTube Channel