Hacker News Reader

Aren’t most of those cases Sony funding the development of a game? I.E. If it does well, great, Sony has a new IP. If it bombs, then it’s Sony’s money down the drain.

I can only see it benefiting the market since certain games might not have gotten made otherwise - e.g. Demon Souls; which spawn quite a number of spin offs, together they practically form their own genre.

View on HN

If Microsoft buys Activision, wouldn't they then be funding Activision's development? The major difference here appears to be looking at a deal in foresight vs. hindsight.

Let me put it this way:

Sony funds developers = PlayStation gets “extra” games that otherwise wouldn’t exist. No one else is affected.

Microsoft buys Activision = long running Activision franchises (eventually) become MS exclusive. Xbox gain nothing but everyone else lose out on franchises they used to enjoy.

Different steps to achieve the same outcome (buying a game company). Why should I, as a consumer, give a shit on the “how”?

Not quite the same outcome.

One brings into existence games that probably wouldn’t have been made otherwise - and the investor takes the risk of the game bombing.

The other is primarily to deny the competition access to long running popular franchises - and is practically risk free since those franchises are almost guaranteed to print money.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com