{"id":5483,"date":"2022-01-22T16:59:06","date_gmt":"2022-01-22T16:59:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/01\/22\/lets-all-chill-for-a-moment-about-microsoft-buying-activision-blizzard\/"},"modified":"2022-01-22T16:59:06","modified_gmt":"2022-01-22T16:59:06","slug":"lets-all-chill-for-a-moment-about-microsoft-buying-activision-blizzard","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/01\/22\/lets-all-chill-for-a-moment-about-microsoft-buying-activision-blizzard\/","title":{"rendered":"Let’s all chill for a moment about Microsoft buying Activision Blizzard"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\n<\/p>\n

\n

Earlier this week, Microsoft took the gaming world by storm with its announcement that it\u2019s purchasing Activision Blizzard for a whopping $68.7 billion USD (about $86.3 billion CAD).<\/p>\n

With that being the biggest-ever acquisition in the gaming space by far, there were, naturally, many discussions that came about surrounding the purchase.<\/p>\n

\n

Today is a historic moment. We are excited to announce that the world-renowned franchises and talented people at @ATVI_AB<\/a> will be joining Team Xbox! \u202f <\/p>\n

Full announcement details here: https:\/\/t.co\/RwF0QgXVwE<\/a> pic.twitter.com\/jIXuYCcndG<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Xbox (@Xbox) January 18, 2022<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

But there have also been so many wild takes to various extremes that I can\u2019t help but say: let\u2019s not jump to conclusions.<\/p>\n

For context, Microsoft itself says it doesn\u2019t expect the deal to close until \u201cfiscal year 2023,\u201d which could be as much as 18 months from now. That\u2019s also assuming the acquisition does<\/em> get approved, but analysts so far expect it will<\/a>. Until then, both Microsoft and Activision Blizzard will continue to operate independently.<\/p>\n

In any event, we have at least a year, if not more, for anything to even remotely begin to happen. Therefore, it\u2019s too early to really speak definitively on anything.\u00a0Here are some common topics I\u2019ve seen come up and why we should maybe<\/em> just have a little more of a measured response for the time being.<\/p>\n

Note: I\u2019m largely not going to link to specific comments I\u2019ve seen as I don\u2019t want to put individual people on blast.<\/em><\/p>\n

Exclusives(?)<\/h2>\n

The biggest question, which has the most direct impact on consumers, is whether Activision Blizzard games will become Xbox and PC only. Some PlayStation fans think this means the end of\u00a0Call of Duty\u00a0<\/em>and other franchises on Sony consoles.<\/p>\n

\n

Had good calls this week with leaders at Sony. I confirmed our intent to honor all existing agreements upon acquisition of Activision Blizzard and our desire to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation. Sony is an important part of our industry, and we value our relationship.<\/p>\n

\u2014 Phil Spencer (@XboxP3) January 20, 2022<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

So far, though, all we know is that Phil Spencer \u2014 the longtime Xbox boss and newly appointed \u201cMicrosoft Gaming CEO\u201d \u2014 said the company will \u201chonor all existing agreements upon acquisition of Activision Blizzard and our desire to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation.\u201d\u00a0As I broke down in a news story<\/a>, this is a carefully worded statement that could mean any number of things:<\/p>\n

-Some Call of Duty titles (like Warzone) remain on PlayStation while others become exclusive
-\u201cExisting agreements\u201d (of which we, the public, don\u2019t know the specifics) means we only get one or two (or however many) more COD<\/em>s on PlayStation before the series shifts to Xbox\/PC only
-The series becomes full Xbox\/PC exclusive (a \u201cdesire\u201d for something potentially 18-plus months, at least, isn\u2019t a guarantee)<\/p>\n

We also don\u2019t know what this means for other Activision Blizzard franchises, like\u00a0Crash Bandicoot<\/em>,\u00a0Spyro the Dragon<\/em>,\u00a0Overwatch\u00a0<\/em>or\u00a0Diablo (<\/em>I\u2019m not counting franchises that have historically only been on PC to begin with, like World of Warcraft\u00a0<\/em>or\u00a0Starcraft<\/em>). According to\u00a0Bloomberg<\/em><\/a>, Microsoft\u2019s plan is to make some franchises exclusive while others remain multiplatform, but no further details were provided. We also haven\u2019t even yet seen Microsoft\u2019s full long-term plans for Bethesda \u2014 so far, only two new IPs, Redfall <\/em>and\u00a0Starfield<\/em>, have been confirmed to be Xbox\/PC exclusive.<\/p>\n

Therefore, no matter which way you swing it, we don\u2019t know for sure re: Activision Blizzard games. PlayStation gamers being wary of losing Call of Duty\u00a0<\/em>is totally understandable, but there\u2019s no reason to be doom and gloom just yet. For now, this year\u2019s inevitable new Call of Duty<\/em>, which is rumoured to be a sequel to 2019\u2019s\u00a0Modern Warfare<\/em><\/a>, will still come to PlayStation.\u00a0All previous modern CoD<\/em>s, including the ever-popular\u00a0Warzone<\/em>, also remain playable. Eighteen months (at minimum; likely even longer for anything to actually change) is a long time, so just enjoy your Call of Duty\u00a0<\/em>games for the time being, PlayStation fans.<\/p>\n

\n

The future of Xbox | Powered by incredible Xbox first-party teams at Xbox Game Studios, Bethesda and Activision Blizzard.<\/p>\n

A first-party studios force surreal to look at. pic.twitter.com\/mvXvtMQB2c<\/a><\/p>\n

\u2014 Klobrille (@klobrille) January 18, 2022<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Even if the titles do go full exclusive, as people some have argued<\/a>, the definition of that term has changed over time. I\u2019ve seen people take issue with Spencer previously saying<\/a> \u201cI find it completely counter to what gaming is about\u201d to lock games to single platforms. They\u2019ve argued he\u2019s hypocritical considering he\u2019s buying up all these studios and making games like Starfield <\/em>\u201cexclusive.\u201d But that\u2019s taking his comments out of context. He went on to say that \u201cgaming is bigger than any one device,\u201d and that\u2019s consistent, so far, with Microsoft\u2019s approach.<\/p>\n

Traditionally, an \u201cexclusive\u201d has been a game that is only available on one console (and maybePC) but isn\u2019t playable on other platforms. Look at what Xbox has done with games like Halo\u00a0<\/em>for years, or even, more recently, PlayStation with such titles as\u00a0God of War<\/em>. This means that you have to drop hundreds of dollars on a specific piece of hardware. But Xbox has been adopting a more platform-agnostic approach as of late, which de-emphasizes the need for a particular system.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cSome have argued this suddenly alleviates Xbox\u2019s first-party output, which has struggled in recent years compared to PlayStation and Nintendo.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In addition to Xbox and PC, all first-party Xbox titles are coming to mobile devices via the cloud, and Microsoft plans to expand that offering to TVs (via streaming sticks and smart TV apps) and other devices. This means that PlayStation (or even Nintendo) gamers wouldn\u2019t need to buy an Xbox or PC. Sure, the best experience would still be to play a game on native hardware \u2014 no question. A fast-paced shooter like\u00a0Call of Duty\u00a0<\/em>definitely wouldn\u2019t be stellar on cloud services as we currently know them; the technology still needs to improve. But to act like such a scenario is \u201ctaking games away from PlayStation\u201d isn\u2019t entirely reasonable since a Game Pass subscription provides a lower-cost and multiplatform option. This isn\u2019t the same as, say,\u00a0Street Fighter V\u00a0<\/em>never\u00a0<\/em>coming to any console besides PlayStation.<\/a> Game Pass is Microsoft\u2019s platform, not one specific device.<\/p>\n

In the end, we don\u2019t know how it will go with Activision Blizzard games, but as you can see, there\u2019s a bit of nuance to the notion of \u201cexclusivity.\u201d<\/p>\n

Consolidations are good\/bad<\/h2>\n

This is a particularly weird one.<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve seen some people, particularly Xbox fans, praise the acquisition. While memes of Phil Spencer wielding an Infinity Gauntlet<\/a> \u00e0 la Thanos in Avengers: Infinity War\u00a0<\/em>can be amusing, there are people saying this means Xbox has \u201cwon the console war\u201d (never mind that the console wars are, as always, an incredibly dumb and pointless fanboy conflict).<\/p>\n

Some have argued this suddenly alleviates Xbox\u2019s first-party output, which has struggled in recent years compared to PlayStation and Nintendo.<\/p>\n

\n

Do you care about Activision-Blizzard staff getting a much-needed change in leadership? Would you prefer Zuckerberg or Bezos? Or do you want to preserve the status quo with Kotick in charge forever?<\/p>\n

This is the best outcome in our current economic system.<\/p>\n

\u2014 Jez (@JezCorden) January 20, 2022<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Windows Central<\/em>\u2018s Jez Corden<\/a> even started a bit of Twitter \u201cdiscourse\u201d with the baffling take<\/a> that \u201cgame journalists\u201d who are critical of the acquisition have a \u201cbias.\u201d His rationale was that they get \u201chuge\u201d editor salaries on top of free games, so they\u2019re out of touch with the value of Activision Blizzard titles coming to Game Pass for consumers. Beyond many game journalists pointing out that they\u2019re not, in fact, anywhere near as highly paid as Corden erroneously stated, it\u2019s just a bad-faith argument.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s completely rational to be apprehensive about any billion-dollar corporation, especially one making an acquisition this staggeringly big. Expressing such skepticism doesn\u2019t mean you\u2019re biased; if anything, the person writing for the Microsoft-focused site is more likely to be guilty of that.\u00a0There definitely<\/em> are valid concerns about monopolistic business practices. For reference, Disney bought Fox in 2019 for $71.3 billion USD<\/a> (nearly the same sum that Activision Blizzard is being purchased for), following major acquisitions of Marvel and Lucasfilm. While the company isn\u2019t a monopoly by legal definitions, its stranglehold on much of what dominates pop-culture is undeniably problematic<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cRegardless of whether you ultimately think Xbox will eventually be a positive or negative force of change for Activision Blizzard, the fact remains that there\u2019s much to be done now.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

In a similar vein, it\u2019s not unreasonable to look at Microsoft owning such juggernauts as Halo<\/em>, Call of Duty,<\/em>\u00a0World of Warcraft<\/em> and\u00a0The Elder Scrolls\u00a0<\/em>as being somewhat concerning. One indie developer even shared an interesting thread<\/a> about how the increasing push for subscription services like Game Pass puts press on \u201ceveryone, devs, publishers, and platforms, toward putting games straight into those programs.\u201d Could Game Pass, as bolstered by heavy hitters like Call of Duty<\/em>, make it ultimately more difficult for devs to find success? Who\u2019s to say now, but it\u2019s possible.<\/p>\n

\n

As an indie game dev I’m really worried about all the industry consolidation. Currently the only guarantee of success for a game is subscriptions, which pushes everyone, devs, publishers, and platforms, toward putting games straight into those programs.<\/p>\n

\u2014 brandon sheffield (@necrosofty) January 18, 2022<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Conversely, people in my own Twitter feed basically said this is a dark time for the gaming industry and that they lost all respect for the otherwise generally well-liked Phil Spencer. That, like Corden\u2019s statement, feels drastic.\u00a0The deal was just announced \u2014 we have no idea what this actually means for Activision Blizzard or Xbox as a whole.\u00a0Again, we haven\u2019t even fully seen what Xbox is going to do with Bethesda, let alone Activision Blizzard. We don\u2019t know whether Microsoft will make any more acquisitions, either.<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t fault anyone for taking an inherently optimistic or pessimistic stance, but at least consider that there\u2019s some nuance here.<\/p>\n

Improving Activision Blizzard<\/h2>\n

And finally, the most important element with respect to the people who actually make Activision Blizzard games is how Microsoft ends up handling the company\u2019s allegedly toxic workplace culture.<\/p>\n

For the uninitiated, a quick recap is that the company is facing lawsuits related to allegations of widespread workplace misconduct<\/a>. These include, but are not limited to, sexual harassment, discriminatory hiring practices and other forms of abuse. CEO Bobby Kotick also stands accused not only of being aware of these issues, but someone who actively tried to keep them quiet. He\u2019s since faced numerous calls to resign. Many employees have spoken up about these issues and walked out from the company, while some at Warzone\u00a0<\/em>developer Raven have even begun to form a union<\/a> amid sudden terminations of quality assurance workers.<\/p>\n

Now, I\u2019ve seen some people blast Spencer for last year condemning Activision Blizzard<\/a> amid the allegations and later saying Microsoft was reevaluating its relationship with the publisher. And for sure, the optics aren\u2019t ideal. Likewise, some have said this gives Kotick a \u201cgolden parachute\u201d to leave the company<\/a> \u2014 which he reportedly is expected to do post-acquisition<\/a> \u2014 with a huge payout. That also isn\u2019t ideal \u2014 he shouldn\u2019t be rewarded after all of this.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

One thing we should all agree on: Bobby Kotick needs to go. Image credit: Wikipedia<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

But it\u2019s also impossible to say what would have happened had this deal not been reached. Would Kotick have remained in power longer? Who knows. Likewise, it\u2019s difficult to speculate on how Microsoft might impact Activision Blizzard since, once again, it won\u2019t have the full power to do so for many, many months. Talking about what Microsoft may start to do in 2023 or even 2024 doesn\u2019t help ActiBlizz developers now, in 2022. For what it\u2019s worth, Activision Blizzard developers have reportedly expressed mixed feelings<\/a> \u2014 particularly optimism over Xbox\u2019s generally well-regarded work culture but anger over how Kotick is likely to make off). That mostly seems like a conversation for another time.<\/p>\n

In the interim, though, it seems more prudent to continue to stand with Activision Blizzard employees in their ongoing efforts.\u00a0 Continue to hold Activision Blizzard accountable, especially when leadership puts out posts promising to \u201crebuild your trust.\u201d<\/a> Support ABetterABK<\/a>, a group representing the employees at the company, either through donations<\/a> or even just solidarity on social media.\u00a0Hell, even just show some love to some of the devs who are no doubt feeling all kinds of emotions right now.<\/p>\n

Regardless of whether you ultimately think Xbox will eventually be a positive or negative force of change for Activision Blizzard, the fact remains that there\u2019s much to be done now<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n

In the end, we have no idea what to really expect once Xbox officially acquires Activision Blizzard. And that\u2019s okay. For now, it\u2019s good to have discussions about it.<\/p>\n

However, I think the perfect note to close all of this on is a tweet from Bloomberg<\/em>\u2018s Jason Schreier<\/a>, which I couldn\u2019t agree with more.<\/p>\n

\u201cOne of the many awful things about Gamer tribalism is how it reduces news to wins or losses, good or bad.\u201d<\/p>\n

That\u2019s very true \u2014 a lot of people have made this news out to be either The Best or The Worst Thing Ever.<\/p>\n

But, as he points out, it\u2019s usually not so black-and-white.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis week\u2019s industry-shaking acquisition will have both positive and negative effects that won\u2019t be fully understood for years,\u201d said Schreier. \u201cIt\u2019s OK to have complicated feelings about it!\u201d<\/p>\n

That, ultimately, should be the current big takeaway out of all this.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n