• RedAggroBest@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    I really don’t get this argument regardless of which way things “should be”.

    Even and independent Activision-Blizzard under Microsoft would have overlap with HR or something. I can’t imagine leaving them “independent” wasn’t going to entail some trimming of fat.

    • EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      According to the article, Microsoft is laying off 1,900 people from its games division, roughly about 8% of the workforce in their game studios. Of those 1,900, at least 899 of them are confirmed to be from Activision-Blizzard’s offices in California, potentially more.

      That’s a lot more like a full merger than the “vertical acquisition” that Microsoft claimed was going to be the case. Obviously, there was going to be some redundancy regardless of how much they were going to be left to self operate, but that’s a lot of jobs cut, and we don’t know what kinds of jobs are even being cut.

      IMO, the merger was a lose-lose situation no matter which way you slice it, either Microsoft further reduces competition with the buyout, or Bobby is left in charge, but the FTC is upset because Microsoft said that Acitivision-Blizzard was basically going to be running as they had been before the buyout.