• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    178
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Capture and kill…

    The only thing better than owning the competition, is putting them out of business.

    So they buy studios that compete, fire all the workers, keep the IPs, and call it a day.

    If we enforced anti-monoply laws this wouldn’t be a thing. But monopolies dontate a lot of money to politicians so they say monopolies aren’t a big deal.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Have you met our political system?

        Primaries literally don’t have to be fair, because the results are nonbinding, the party can just pick someone else.

        And the people in charge keep loosening regulations so they can get bigger donations.

        They’re openly running a PAC that coordinates with Biden and the DNC that individuals can legally donate a million a year.

        https://apnews.com/article/biden-2024-democrats-dnc-state-parties-ac8fba0ab1117ebf75cc16ebe0c735e4

        https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00744946/

        Average Americans are being priced out of democracy by both parties. The candidate for both will be who the wealthy pick, and everyone will have to vote if they want to keep who they hate most out of office.

        If you’re wealthy there’s no way to lose, if you’re the other 99.9% you can’t win.

        Regular people can’t out lobby Microsoft and Disney, and unless a progressive third party emerges the system will keep getting worse.

        • applepie@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          While political system is captured… I am talking about gen pop discourse. Vast majority got nothing to hide, it is convienient, poor people suck, shoulda worked harder, quit being poor, there is nothing can be, we just really don’t know.

          This rhetoric is pathetic for any self respecting adult yet here we are.

          Sure if everybody got educated about their lot in life they could theoretically vote in a third party but let’s be real here, we got some app to circle jerk for engagement slop that induces you to buy plastic shit to make feelz

        • icydefiance@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          unless a progressive third party emerges the system will keep getting worse

          If a progressive third party emerges, they’ll split the vote with Democrats, making both of them weaker. That’ll just give every election to Republicans and make the country get worse even faster.

          The only way to get progressive candidates is by moving the Overton window to the left, and the only way to do that is by voting for Democrats.

    • Ilflish@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      People tried to block the Activision acquisition. Some were mocked for their attempt and some were mocked for their stance. It wasn’t enforced because for all the attempts, it couldn’t be proved which is more an indicator better definitions needed to be in place

  • (⬤ᴥ⬤)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    144
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    INVESTORS INVESTORS LOOK AT HOW MANY STUDIOS WE CAN BUY LOOK LOOK WE’RE SOOO PROFITABLE
    two hours later
    WERE REMOVING SO MUCH DEAD WEIGHT INVESTORS LOOK WE’RE GOING TO BE SO PROFITABLE AFTER THIS

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Reduce the number of studios. The number of sold copies of games stays constant. Therefore, the money going to the remaining studios goes up.

      If the cost of purchasing the studio is less than the number of diverted sales, its in your interest to buy up and shut down competition. The only reason this math would change is if people exclusively purchased from the shut-down studios. And we all know why they don’t.

      As a kicker, you can wring some extra cash out of old properties by turning them into shitty reskinned Pay2Win mobile games covered in the flesh mask of the old IP.

      • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Therefore, the money going to the remaining studios goes up.

        LOL

        People believe this shit? The money goes directly to some CX or some manegement asshole or chair or board or fucking whatever. What studios? What devs?

      • TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        Or license it to a third party studio who does a great job, puts out a quality product, then gets bought out and gutted.

  • Itsamelemmy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Microsoft has been a fucking blight on gaming. Paid online, and timed exclusives both started there. No resale if we didn’t throw a massive fit about it. Buying up studios to kill them. I mean Sony has their share of being fucks as well, but at least they’re making good games. Microsoft has barely any decent games the last 2 generations, and hellblade 2 which is looking great was a Sony game that they had to buy and make exclusive.

        • Boozilla@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Looks at ballot.

          “Is carbonite, like…an actual thing? Can I be frozen like Han Solo? I have a little bit of money saved up. Which stupid tech bro startup can do this for me?”

            • dot0@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              6 months ago

              wait so the bodies are frozen after the person has already died?

              I thought the point was to get frozen while still alive so that you could be thawed out in the future and continue living. which, while still very stupid, is something I can wrap my head around as a concept.

              am I just now learning that the whole thing is predicated on the wish that we will one day be able to reanimate dead people??

              • mynachmadarch@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                6 months ago

                They ideal for most of them is absolutely that they can be frozen while still alive and unfrozen later. We are nowhere near that technology though so most fallback to the second hope. Yes, that is that when they’re unfrozen in the future we can cure whatever it is that killed them. From what I’ve seen in documentaries, most of the people signing up know it’s the world’s furthest longshot, but they figure they’re dead either way, why not take it? Worst that happens is they stay dead but hopefully science learned something from their body at least, best case is they wake up in the 24½th century and keep on truckin.

                • thefartographer@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Also, considering that they need access to freeze things inside of you quickly enough, such as your brain, I think most subjects would prefer that they were dead first.

          • bigkahuna1986@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            I don’t have carbonite but for the right price I can pack you into a freezer filled with ice. That should do the trick.

      • woelkchen@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        In a sane country there would be laws to prevent this monopoly shit.

        The problem is that Microsoft is no monopoly in gaming.

          • woelkchen@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            So you want to do something about it after they are a monopoly?

            Me? Why me? You were talking about countries and I was explaining that countries don’t apply monopoly laws to non-monopolies.

            • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Actually the laws are meant to apply BEFORE that happens.

              What good is trying to stop a monopoly after it’s fully established? You need to deal with it when it starts, not when it’s done.

        • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          They have the money to basically buy any studio they want if they could, Nintendo and Sony included.

          Their gaming division isn’t a monopoly, but with their parents funding yeah they could be and that’s the problem. They could buy everyone up and leave them selves alone in the market.

          • woelkchen@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Their gaming division isn’t a monopoly, but with their parents funding yeah they could be and that’s the problem.

            I agree it’s a problem but without Microsoft being a monopoly in gaming, no watchdog will do anything about it.

            • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              The FTC was trying to do something. Than Microsoft convinced them they weren’t going to do X if they sold Y, so they let the cloud gaming go, and then immediately did what they said they wouldn’t.

              If they didn’t lie to the FTC they would have done something about it than and there.

              It’s not a monopoly until it is, and that’s what they are trying to avoid, stuff getting to that point in the first place.

                • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  6 months ago

                  Yes, they let the cloud gaming go so the EU wouldn’t deem them a monopoly, they than told the FTC they weren’t going to lay anyone off. And a month later or so they laid off 2000 employees while using the excuse it was happening anyways regardless of the merger.

                  What other merger was there you could be confusing this with?

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      6 months ago

      They wanted to be the new Sony and Nintendo combined, but instead they’re the new EA.

    • Neato@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      Trying to force online only as well. That nearly killed an entire console generation for them.

    • Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      You say, “timed exclusives” as a negative meanwhile Nintendo dominates the market and never releases its exclusives.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Microsoft has barely any decent games the last 2 generations

      I remember buying the XBox and only ever owning Halo for years, because the rest of the library was utter shit. Then Halo got too popular and Microsoft had to gut the talent and sell the husk for scraps.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    70
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    its clear in hindsight that there needs to be more regulation to prevent buyouts of competitors and more protections for workers under buyouts/mergers such as paying workers for at least 3 years after the sale of a company.

      • Fedizen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        3 gives people time to wrap up projects, move etc, basically any life most folks could have reasonably scheduled can be shifted in 3 years, it gives new parents time to take care of their kid and transition back to normal work. And the way to do it would be to have the companies pay the wages whether they lay them off or not (encouraging retraining rather than layoffs.)

        Although if what you wanted to do was was absolutely ruin the incentives that mergers create for layoffs the average appointment length of a CEO might do it.

  • PhAzE@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    6 months ago

    Microsoft is buying up companies to stockpile IP. Simple as that.

    Then they have a lot of redundant workers so they let them go, leaving the IP in their hands to be filed away for potential lawsuits against infringers.

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    they did this with the t-mobile sidekick… they bought the platform and all data outright… then ‘oops! we lost all your end-user, cloud stored data, sorry! we were just too busy to do our jobs!’

    thanks, microsoft.

  • Hadriscus@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    6 months ago

    ah, yes, the highest market cap in history ($3T) doesn’t have the resources

    • ryper@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      Well, you see, they don’t have cash on hand because they spent it on stock buybacks to boost that market cap

  • twinnie@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    All MS want to produce are sequels to their tired franchises. Does anyone even buy Halo anymore?

    • Cyborganism@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      Halo wasn’t even all that great to be honest. It was popular because it was an accessible, easy to play FPS on a console during a time when those types of games were mostly played on PC.

        • Kedly@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          Mine personally is that all past Reach were garbage, I’ll never forgive what 4 did to the lore, humanity being around and a spacefaring race back when the forerunners were was fucking stupid

          • g0d0fm15ch13f@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            What if I told you that 343 didn’t make that decision. Ever wonder why Guilty Spark called Master Chief reclaimer? Though I agree with your point, 4 was the last halo game I bought.

            • Kedly@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              All of the lore snippets we got before 4 kind of hinted that Humanity was chosen as the next tech bearer because they were on the verge of a sentience level that the rings would exterminate, but not fully there yet, the fact that the forerunners would choose to pass the mantle on to a race they were actively at war with INSTEAD OF SAVING THEIR OWN RACE, is BEYOND stupid

          • ramirezmike@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 months ago

            goldeneye 64 was pretty innovative even compared to its pc competition at the time. It suffered from performance issues, but the xbla remake or just good emulator settings fix that and really make it shine

      • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        No way dude. it revitalized the fps genre which was circling the drain at the time, and some ideas Halo had are still felt in fps games today.

        • Cyborganism@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          I disagree. Half Life was top dog back then with Counter Strike, and Unreal Tournament and Quake arena for the multiplayer arena fps genre.

          I found Halo’s level design pretty boring and repetitive. The story wasn’t appealing to me either. I didn’t like the American-like militarism aspect. Especially in that post-9/11 period.

          • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Oh? Maybe a bit hyperbolic perhaps. How bout this instead? Halo created a new renaissance for a genre that before Halo was niche, and afterwards became a powerhouse genre that drives the industry.

            • wellheh@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Crazy take. Op was right that halo basically made fps more accessible for console players- that along with great storytelling is its real legacy. At the time, if you wanted the most out of fps games, you’d buy a PC and pick up a copy of Half-Life from a store, find an update off a shady ftp, then after install you’d have access to tons of mods giving you access to an array of truly unique experiences. Fps weren’t really made for console at the time and lacked a lot of usability (I.e. aim assist was not well developed, games were way faster and also more difficult for console controls). Counter-strike paved the way with TAC shooters and streamlining fps, but again you needed Half-Life and the retail port didn’t come until 2003. Halo brought a console first experience with casual play in mind, most notable: low gravity for easier positioning and easier to shoot players, spawning with a decent weapon so you weren’t outclassed off spawn, limited you to carrying only two weapons for easier weapon management, slow movement, and regen so you didn’t have to chase health packs. This wouldn’t be complete without me actually saying what Halo was good for- Notable innovations were obviously its physics and graphics engine, extensive user input assistance (aim assist and movement assist), use of vehicles (other games were clunky and there was little to do other than drive from one point to the next), story telling, sophisticated AI, and system link. To call halo some sort of Renaissance game that vitalized a dead genre is so very weird- you do realize this was the time of Counter-strike, team fortress, unreal tournament, quake, tribes, alien vs predator… Esports was growing with CPL and ESWC, both with majority fps-only titles. I can only assume you were not alive to experience it.

              • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                Well im 45, so there’s that. Feel free to disagree, but i look at widespread casual usage of fps as a genre for everyoneas a measure of “driving a market”, not esports which are cool, but niche (especially then). esports, CS, UT, and the like were PC only, and PC gaming itself was at the time smaller.

                While those games existed and indeed so did esports, that and what i am saying (widespread, universal appeal for as you call them “casuals”) are two very different things. Two disparate things.

                So finally im sensing from you that you’re not the kind of person in interested in talking to. Its a feeling i get that you just want to put others down. I might be wrong. Prove me wrong. Do you feel like walking that comment where you call my opinion wrong because of ignorance back, and maybe we can talk like peers? Perhaps we could talk about the impacts halo did have, or the impacts other games you mentioned has that were greater than halos. Maybe that would be information and fun for the both of us.

                Or, do you want to keep waving your opinion in front of me and being dismissive? One of those choices continues this conversation. I am at this point ambivalent.

                Balls in your court.

      • CynicalStoic@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Totally agree! I remember being shuttled to the demo XBox by a GameStop employee who was fawning over the first Halo and I was not impressed having just finished Half Life 2

      • Blackmist@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Halo under Bungie was pretty damn good.

        They were unique for that OG Xbox era of consoles, and although there were a lot of great games on the PS2, the one thing they sorely lacked was a really good FPS. Timesplitters was close, but Halo was where FPS first felt designed for a controller. The level design was on point as well, things like The Silent Cartographer still hold up now. It wasn’t just a series of corridors.

        Other devs cracked it by the next gen, notably Infinity Ward, but back in that generation Halo stood alone.

    • the post of tom joad@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      I actually would buy halo remastered if it were a non-insane price. I would buy a copy for me and the friend i logged countless of hours of co-op with… but they won’t sell it to us w/o making us buy a package with a ton of the other halo games wwe don’t care about.

      So i guess i don’t buy halo anymore either.

      • mynachmadarch@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        There are dozens of us! Dozens!

        Halo’s problem with both 5 and Infinite seems to be the game eventually reaches a great point, but by then everyone has left for the most part, and with it having happened twice they’re going to struggle getting people back for Infinite 2: Reclaimer Boogaloo or whatever they name it. Just give those passionate devs a longer leash and let them cook please.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I feel quite certain that this was the plan all along.

    Shit like this should cause the purchased entity to revert to prior ownership without refund to the purchaser.