Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision has been followed by significant price hikes and layoffs, harming both gamers and developers.
As we’ve seen across sectors, increasing market consolidation and increasing prices often go hand-in-hand.
As dominant firms become too-big-to-care, they can make things worse for their customers without having to worry about the consequences.
In all fairness, the prices of entire business is going up, including from their competitors, due to number of factors that has nothing to do with the acquisition. The question is, would Microsoft stay at the same price even if they didn’t purchase Activision-Blizzard-King? Would Microsoft layoff people and replace them with Ai, even if they did not buy Activision? What do other companies do? Would Microsoft change the Game Pass price anyway, because it did not workout well (especially without Activision library included)? What is the competition doing?
The competition is following an industry leader who is only an industry leader because their other business makes so much money hand over fist that they can just keep dumping money into gaming just to maintain dominance. The answer to the question you propose another question “How can we cut costs and increase profit?” And the easiest way to do that is to reduce labor and raise prices, and if they can get away with it, Monopolize. So yes, Microsoft executives would be doing this exact same thing without the Activision Blizzard purchase. But because they can get away with purchasing all potential competition, they’ll do that first.
Well, I can say for certain a whole bunch of devs were/are out of a job specifically due to the merger, so she’s certainly correct on that point. Prices… one could argue the tariffs and general iffyness about the economy are driving those.
The dominance of the two largest video game companies affects prices for everyone. High game prices are justified by “just get it on Game Pass,” which normalizes the cost. Now that subscription prices are also rising, developers are left to face investors with unrealistic expectations based on these corporate practices, an issue made worse by weak regulation. Some people may get it but most consumers don’t care until they can’t afford their gotcha game addiction.
Yes. And even investors are worse off, in the long run.
Analysts recognize that Amazon is worth substantially less than Amazon Books, Amazon Web Services, Amazon Fulfillment and Amazon Prime would be valued at as separate companies.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
No Let’s Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates.
(Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources.
If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
In all fairness, the prices of entire business is going up, including from their competitors, due to number of factors that has nothing to do with the acquisition. The question is, would Microsoft stay at the same price even if they didn’t purchase Activision-Blizzard-King? Would Microsoft layoff people and replace them with Ai, even if they did not buy Activision? What do other companies do? Would Microsoft change the Game Pass price anyway, because it did not workout well (especially without Activision library included)? What is the competition doing?
Good questions. Those problems are all exacerbated after two giant “competing” corporations merged into one even larger corporation.
The competition is following an industry leader who is only an industry leader because their other business makes so much money hand over fist that they can just keep dumping money into gaming just to maintain dominance. The answer to the question you propose another question “How can we cut costs and increase profit?” And the easiest way to do that is to reduce labor and raise prices, and if they can get away with it, Monopolize. So yes, Microsoft executives would be doing this exact same thing without the Activision Blizzard purchase. But because they can get away with purchasing all potential competition, they’ll do that first.
everyone with a functioning brain knew this deal was a bad idea.
I wish Lina Khan was on Mastodon.
Well, I can say for certain a whole bunch of devs were/are out of a job specifically due to the merger, so she’s certainly correct on that point. Prices… one could argue the tariffs and general iffyness about the economy are driving those.
Who cares? Anyone in bed with microsoft or activision deserves all the shit coming their way and then some.
The dominance of the two largest video game companies affects prices for everyone. High game prices are justified by “just get it on Game Pass,” which normalizes the cost. Now that subscription prices are also rising, developers are left to face investors with unrealistic expectations based on these corporate practices, an issue made worse by weak regulation. Some people may get it but most consumers don’t care until they can’t afford their gotcha game addiction.
It doesn’t affect prices for me.
I haven’t bought a video game in years and I don’t plan on starting anytime soon.
It’ll be nice when the leeches bleed the industry dry and we’re only left with people that, you know, actually care about the games.
When one company buys another company, good things rarely happen, unless you’re an executive or investor.
Yes. And even investors are worse off, in the long run.
Analysts recognize that Amazon is worth substantially less than Amazon Books, Amazon Web Services, Amazon Fulfillment and Amazon Prime would be valued at as separate companies.
Investors would win big in a break up of Amazon.