What the Microsoft-Activision Blizzard buyout could mean for labor and monopolies in the gaming industry
Microsoft recently made a startling improver to its development studio acquisitions, scooping up Activision Blizzard for nearly $lxx billion in the midst of the studio's ongoing reckoning with numerous allegations of harassment and misconduct. In the wake of Microsoft's spending spree of 2022 and 2022, in which the visitor snapped up numerous smaller developers in accelerate of the release of the Xbox Serial X/Southward, this latest merger has many pondering what the futurity of the company, and the gaming industry at big, will look similar.
With one major company laying claim to dozens of smaller studios and some of the most well-known IPs in gaming — including The Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Doom, and at present Warcraft and Call of Duty — the word "monopoly" is on many people'south lips, with some wondering what it means for the industry when so many disparate entities go united under one proper name. For the employees of Activision Blizzard specifically, the answer is likely to be: in the short term, not much.
What will alter within Activision Blizzard?
For many of the rank-and-file developers at Activision Blizzard, it's entirely possible that things will continue equally normal. The company will all the same continue to brand games, after all, even subsequently it becomes part of the Microsoft family. Code volition need writing, assets will need rendering, and voiced lines will need recording. Notwithstanding, every bit Ask a Game Dev points out, the higher levels of management could see some significant changes in the coming weeks and months now that they have to answer to Microsoft. As role of a larger entity, the whole relationship between the studio's decisions and the desires of shareholders has shifted considerably. Equally such, Microsoft could want to take action that would technically result in a "loss" for Activision, like putting more of its games on Game Pass or limiting the potential audience by making them Xbox exclusives, in the name of increasing the value of the Xbox brand overall.
For other departments though, it could be a scrap more of a thorny question. In that location'southward unlikely to exist quite every bit much need for several of the more than business-oriented departments at Activision Blizzard once Microsoft takes over, and then HR, accounting, legal, and more than could see themselves merged with Microsoft'south existing teams at all-time, or laid off at worst.
All this could provide enough of fodder for the ongoing labor move A Better ABK, a workers' collective led by current and former Activision Blizzard employees. The grouping has been advocating for workers' rights for several months in the wake of the company'due south harassment allegations and the layoff of dozens of QA employees from subsidiary Raven Software, but news of the merger has some members a piffling shaken. A Better ABK's official Twitter account is continuing firm, describing the conquering equally "surprising" merely saying that it "does not modify the goals" of the group.
Others, though, are warier: activist and onetime Activision employee Jessica Gonzales tweeted "I need to know Phil [Spencer]'southward thoughts on unionization, and then I'll be fine," while Activision QA Tester Jiji Saari explained that she was "pretty worried we're gonna be lost in the shuffle and merely told to deal with information technology." Saari's concerns aren't without merit — if you lot've been on the Internet at all in the concluding 12 hours, you almost certainly will have seen something well-nigh the merger, and at that place'due south certainly a chance of any other news about the visitor fading into the background — and it'due south doubtless disheartening to anticipate Activision CEO Bobby Kotick, who became entangled in the various controversies directly dorsum in November, getting a $300 million gilded parachute after his contributions to the company'southward problematic environment.
Will there exist a culture shift with Microsoft in charge?
Still, it might not be all doom and gloom at the newly-acquired Activision Blizzard studios. Xbox head Phil Spencer expressed his "horror" at the allegations against the company back in November, and he talked virtually some of the means that Xbox has addressed toxicity in its work environment and in its community at large in an NYT interview earlier this month. As such, a new owner could be a step in the correct direction for the beleaguered company. Indeed, a (relatively) make clean slate could run into Activision Blizzard beginning to accept steps like those touted by EA, and foster a safer and more compassionate work environment.
Notwithstanding, the recent acquisition does send something of a confusing message to those advocating for workers' rights. For all the good that may come from the bargain — if indeed Microsoft does intend to result meaningful change within the company — it feels almost antithetical to rely on the whims of huge companies to solve these issues. In some means, the protection of a larger entity like Microsoft could even make it more than hard for labor movements to agitate for change in the future, equally its significant influence and impressive resources could derail strikes and unionization attempts more than easily.
This, actually, is the effect that sits at the heart of the "monopoly" problem. There may exist disagreement on whether Microsoft even counts as a monopoly now, but the fact is that the visitor now owns dozens of smaller studios, all working together to churn out content for the parent corporation. The consequences of that hinge almost entirely on how Microsoft chooses to direct its considerable resources.
How could this deal impact game development every bit a whole?
On the one hand, the cushion of Microsoft'southward funding has allowed many smaller developers to work in less stressful environments, with a guarantee of publishing at the end of the road. Microsoft'due south patronage of Double Fine, for example, is arguably the main reason we got the beloved sequel to 2005's Psychonauts over 15 years later, and plenty of other devs have seen more than traction than they could ever have anticipated by releasing their games on Xbox Game Pass.
On the other hand, though, if Microsoft chooses to wield its power more every bit an fe fist than a velvet glove, we could see the futurity of workers' movements in the industry stymied and unable to build upwards sufficient momentum to put pressure on the tech behemoth. On acme of that, studios could end upward pressured into plumbing fixtures their games into a crowd-sourced, focus-grouped mold, stifling the creativity that consumers have come to dear. Even fans' buying power could be curtailed — subsequently all, how are yous supposed to vote with your wallet when all of your favorite franchises are owned by a single corporation?
For now, at least, Microsoft appears to exist taking a benevolent approach to overseeing its subsidiary studios. The unfolding situation with Activision Blizzard will be telling, because the company'southward troubled last year or so, and could well reveal Microsoft's strategy going forward. As savvy and ethical consumers, it'due south of import to stay informed in situations similar these, and worker alliances similar A Ameliorate ABK and A Better Ubisoft are a adept identify to outset. Ultimately, however many more companies Microsoft lays claim to, its future business concern decisions will still be defined past the needs and desires of its audience — so making worker welfare a priority, and a vocal one, certainly can't hurt.
Source: https://www.gamepur.com/features/what-the-microsoft-activision-blizzard-buyout-could-mean-for-labor-and-monopolies-in-the-gaming-industry
Posted by: greeneworsoll.blogspot.com
0 Response to "What the Microsoft-Activision Blizzard buyout could mean for labor and monopolies in the gaming industry"
Post a Comment