What the Activision Blizzard deal means for game devs and platforms

polygon.com:

So, what does Microsoft buying Activision Blizzard really mean for regular game developers — and game platforms? Well, firstly — it’s fractally complex. No one deal like this is transformative, and no one deal can significantly hasten the path to “the future.”

But this acquisition — which used the equivalent of over half of Microsoft’s $130 billion “cash on hand,” by the way — feels significantly different to the ZeniMax/Bethesda deal, and not just in terms of sheer money paid.

The Bethesda deal, which was “just” $7.5 billion, felt a bit more like “we would like to own more great content and give Game Pass a large boost, and this is a great way to spend some money.” This $68.7 billion Activision Blizzard deal feels more like “we see what other big companies like Apple and Facebook are planning for the future of the Internet and games, and this is our response.”

So let’s drill down into the multiple angles on this deal. And we’ll end up at a place where we can decode ramifications for everyone else making games not, uhh, owned by Microsoft.

Where it gets complicated is how the idea of a “game platform” is evolving. Sure, Xbox is a hardware platform — that’s the traditional use of the word. But Game Pass is a platform that spans multiple types of hardware — Xbox consoles, PCs, cloud-enabled mobile devices, and beyond.

And beyond that, games — Minecraft, Call of Duty, World of Warcraft, you get the idea — can be platforms. Perhaps, in Microsoft’s current parlance, “metaverse platforms.” Though I know a lot of us aren’t fans of the word metaverse being slung around too aggressively, given its mushy nature, and Facebook’s attempted commandeering of the conversation around it.

But large companies need to stake out their own