Microsoft acquired Activision Blizzard King for $69 Billion on 2023-10-13

[Deleted member 11852]

Looking back over my almost 42 year existence I have been playing games since I was around 3 on my fathers intellivision. I have played thousands of games across every platform known to man. I would say there are perhaps a 100 or so games across that library of games that I ever go back too.

As I've got older and have less and less time to play games, I've definitely settled into a stable of games which I play all the time. Without even having to think about it, I know that I have put more collective hours into into the Fallout, Elder Scrolls, GTA, Total War, and Crusader Kings games, along with Stellaris, and Rimworld then every other game combined - that'll be thousands. I reckon I'll be adding Starfield to that list as well.

These are games where the developer nailed the mechanics, and build a game with near limitless deployability value.

 

[Cyan]

So, one sign that Microsoft's acquisition of ABK will likely go through. For the first time ever, Blizzard games are going to appear on Steam.

Blizzard games are coming to Steam

Steam meets Blizzard.

www.theverge.com

Some Activision games (COD) started to appear on Steam shortly after the announcement of Microsoft and ABK entering into a deal to be acquired, but Blizzard games had been absent. Activision games had been on the service in the past before Activision opened their own storefront, but Blizzard games never have been.

Regards,
SB

hope the Battlenet launcher can still be usable though. It's one of the few launchers I find palatable. It's restrained, not opulent and to the point. It's also easy to know when there is some incidence and so on.

Talking of launchers..., beware of this, if true.... I have some Ubisoft games I purchased using this launcher, a year ago.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1682653876418224129

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't think so as ubisoft has a lot of drama with the stock and hostile take over attempts.

My guess is that they figure all non diablo,cod, over watch stuff from ABK will become exclusive to xbox freeing up purchases on ps5 for ubisoft to gain a better foot hold.

Reads to me more like he's telling shareholders they can hope for a big purchase and ROI.

"I think it's good news that the transaction can go through because it really shows the power of IPs, and where the industry is going," said Guillemot via GameSpot. "So there will be lots of opportunities in the future for all the companies.

The only value to the Ubi shareholders from the MS<>ABK transaction and 'how the industry is going' is more consolidation and purchasing large pubs at big prices. He also uses ABK's value on mobile to justify Ubi investment in mobile to same shareholders.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Talking of launchers..., beware of this, if true.... I have some Ubisoft games I purchased using this launcher, a year ago.

From the details though, it's accounts that are inactive for 4 years and there's a 30 day warning email ahead of anything happening. OTOH it sucks. OTOH if you aren't actually using the content and can't sell it on, you aren't really losing anything if it goes. I had a clearing out the other day and found a Transformers puzzle from when I was a kid. It had say in a cupboard for countless years doing nothing. If it had been removed from existence after 4 years of no use, it'd have done me a favour! Now if only the same would happen with all the non-recyclable polycarbonate discs I still have, that I don't want to throw because they are landfill but I don't have any use for either.

 

[Cyan]

From the details though, it's accounts that are inactive for 4 years and there's a 30 day warning email ahead of anything happening. OTOH it sucks. OTOH if you aren't actually using the content and can't sell it on, you aren't really losing anything if it goes. I had a clearing out the other day and found a Transformers puzzle from when I was a kid. It had say in a cupboard for countless years doing nothing. If it had been removed from existence after 4 years of no use, it'd have done me a favour! Now if only the same would happen with all the non-recyclable polycarbonate discs I still have, that I don't want to throw because they are landfill but I don't have any use for either.

well, we love you Shifty, though imho your reasoning is so flawed you could well repent so deeply... and nobody would say you are wrong. What Ubisoft is doing is illegal.

If you genuinely buy something, it's yours forever. You paid for the ownership and I don't see how someone can strip you off that ownership 'cos of prolongued inactivity.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

If you genuinely buy something, it's yours forever.

Yes, but software on a server ends up being something different, a service with an account. A once off payment for an indefinite license to use a service is not the same as owning it outright an more than a one month sub for Netflix is. It's all about what the service provides.

I'm not saying Ubi are right - some claim their T&Cs don't include any such conditions, and potentially in the EU they can't deny access like this. However, you won't lose anything if 1) you access your content once in a while and 2) You push the button you are directed to when warned about the account being closed.

You paid for the ownership and I don't see how someone can strip you off that ownership 'cos of prolongued inactivity.

Database bloat. Perhaps someone created a one-off account to play one game, finished it, and now don't care for it ever again. They're just filling up the database then for no reason. Or what if they've died? They have no need of the account. PSN, XB and Apple have activity requirements like this also where 'inactivity' counts as two years no access.

Steam has no such clause.

The devil is in the details of the T&C you agreed to without reading for each service.

 

[eastmen]

As I've got older and have less and less time to play games, I've definitely settled into a stable of games which I play all the time. Without even having to think about it, I know that I have put more collective hours into into the Fallout, Elder Scrolls, GTA, Total War, and Crusader Kings games, along with Stellaris, and Rimworld then every other game combined - that'll be thousands. I reckon I'll be adding Starfield to that list as well.

These are games where the developer nailed the mechanics, and build a game with near limitless deployability value.

Yes there are a lot of games like that but I"d wager for every 1 game like that for me there are a 100 that I can't even recall playing.

It's great to see a game company expanding access to these titles. It's why I would love to see MS buy atari and intelivision rights and all the other defunct console companies just so they create a emulator for all that and put it on their console and pc. Then it could in theory live for decades more in an eassy to access way

Reads to me more like he's telling shareholders they can hope for a big purchase and ROI.

"I think it's good news that the transaction can go through because it really shows the power of IPs, and where the industry is going," said Guillemot via GameSpot. "So there will be lots of opportunities in the future for all the companies.

The only value to the Ubi shareholders from the MS<>ABK transaction and 'how the industry is going' is more consolidation and purchasing large pubs at big prices. He also uses ABK's value on mobile to justify Ubi investment in mobile to same shareholders.

Ubisoft could be bought as their market cap is just 4b but like I said there are other companies trying to take over the company. It will be hard to make a sale if large voting blocks of share holders want to purchase the company and not let a MS/Sony/Tencent/ Epic buy it.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

hope the Battlenet launcher can still be usable though. It's one of the few launchers I find palatable. It's restrained, not opulent and to the point. It's also easy to know when there is some incidence and so on.

Talking of launchers..., beware of this, if true.... I have some Ubisoft games I purchased using this launcher, a year ago.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1682653876418224129

It's a side effect of the GDPR in Europe. Notice there is no similar language for the US as they aren't required to purge personal information if (IMO, nebulous and too vague wording on the part of the GDPR) it is no longer deemed "necessary" for UBIsoft to keep it.

Likely just a safety precaution in Europe to avoid the EU potentially looking into whether they have or have not violated the GDPR.

Regards,
SB

 

[Deleted member 11852]

So, one sign that Microsoft's acquisition of ABK will likely go through. For the first time ever, Blizzard games are going to appear on Steam.

It's unrelated. Activision-Blizzard began this a year ago. Microsoft shadow-puppeting Activsion-Blizzard would raise all sorts of anti-trust and collusion issues.

 

[cheapchips]

It's unrelated. Activision-Blizzard began this a year ago.

I forgot COD had come to Steam. I though it was just them reacting to Overwatch 2's shrinking player numbers, but guess it's not just that.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I forgot COD had come to Steam. I though it was just them reacting to Overwatch 2's shrinking player numbers, but guess it's not just that.

I can count on one hand the number of games that I have bought that were not on Steam, e.g. Mass Effect 3. If a publisher isn't selling on the platform I'm using the most (Steam) and which I use my Store Wishlist to track intended purchases, then unless the title is exceptional, the publisher probably isn't getting any business from me.

But there isn't much in Activision's line-up that I'm interested in. Blizzard on the other hand...

 

[cheapchips]

I can count on one hand the number of games that I have bought that were not on Steam, e.g. Mass Effect 3. If a publisher isn't selling on the platform I'm using the most (Steam) and which I use my Store Wishlist to track intended purchases, then unless the title is exceptional, the publisher probably isn't getting any business from me.

But there isn't much in Activision's line-up that I'm interested in. Blizzard on the other hand...

It's not heathy to have Steam be an almost monopoly, but if D4 was on there, that's where I'd have bought it. Terrible for Activision if people are doing that. It's xx% of profits out the door into Valve's hands but so much easier for me to install on the Deck!

 

[Shifty Geezer]

It's not heathy to have Steam be an almost monopoly, but if D4 was on their that's where I'd have bought it. Terrible for Activision if people are doing that. It's xx% of profits out the door into Valve's hands but so much easier for me to install on the Deck!

That's always the issue with middlemen, but middlemen also facilitate commerce and tend to be a net gain. Admittedly it doesn't make much sense in a digital economy, but if you can't communicate to your target audience to buy direct, you need a middleman. If I make the most amazing product ever, I'll need to sell it on Amazon if I want sales, or a killer, expensive, ad campaign to drive traffic to my direct sales website.

 

[Silent_Buddha]

It's not heathy to have Steam be an almost monopoly, but if D4 was on there, that's where I'd have bought it. Terrible for Activision if people are doing that. It's xx% of profits out the door into Valve's hands but so much easier for me to install on the Deck!

They'd lose some margin, but gain a lot more sales. I haven't purchased a single COD game since it left the Steam store. Prior to that I generally purchased them. I know some other people that stopped buying Activision games after they were removed from Steam. It's just a, IMO, hassle to have multiple storefronts and launchers. Hell, I hadn't even booted up the Battle.net launcher since like 2020 or 2019 because I just did not want to use it anymore. And I'm close to uninstalling it again just because I don't find D4 to be enjoyable (too easy). So, I regret going through all the trouble at D4 launch to get the stupid launcher working (worked fine during BETA then it refused to install the game after launch).

Regards,
SB

 

[Silent_Buddha]

It's unrelated. Activision-Blizzard began this a year ago. Microsoft shadow-puppeting Activsion-Blizzard would raise all sorts of anti-trust and collusion issues.

It likely wasn't at Microsoft's request, but likely shareholder pressure due to the impending sale. IE - Kotick no longer had a reason to continue to withhold the games from Steam due to Microsoft releasing all of their games on Steam.

I'm extremely skeptical that Activision games would ever have reappeared on Steam if not for the pending MS sale. And Blizzard games certainly never would have.

Regards,
SB

 

[Deleted member 11852]

It likely wasn't at Microsoft's request, but likely shareholder pressure due to the impending sale. IE - Kotick no longer had a reason to continue to withhold the games from Steam due to Microsoft releasing all of their games on Steam.

Doubtful, if you look at who owns the largest share blocks in Activision-Blizzard it is all investment firms. They don't get involved in trying to manage the companies whose shares they represent to their investors. If shareholders are dissatisfied with the way a company is run, they replace the management team. Relative to Activision's profits, the mild bump from release some older games on Steam is going to have a margin impact to their bottom line.

I think this is no more than a change in direction by the current management team.

 

[SmooTh]

After delay n delay NZ approved

https://twitter.com/x/status/1688727713635328004

Commerce Commission - Microsoft Corporation; Activision Blizzard Inc

comcom.govt.nz

 

[eastmen]

After delay n delay NZ approved

https://twitter.com/x/status/1688727713635328004

Commerce Commission - Microsoft Corporation; Activision Blizzard Inc

comcom.govt.nz

how many countries are still outstanding on a decision ?

 

[Deleted member 11852]

There are five territories left to approve, three are known, two I am only aware of due to my job. Microsoft have not made any mention pf them as far as I can tell but they didn't mention a bunch before the outcome was known so there could be a bunch more.

 

[see colon]

They'd lose some margin, but gain a lot more sales. I haven't purchased a single COD game since it left the Steam store. Prior to that I generally purchased them. I know some other people that stopped buying Activision games after they were removed from Steam.

That "some margin" is significant, though. Steam take 30%, right? That means for every 7 games sold on Steam, Activision's cut is the same as 5 copies from a storefront they take 100% from.