Jump to content

Microsoft is buying Activision Blizzard for $68.7 billion [FTC sues to stop - CMA issues updated preliminary findings]


waltdisneypixar

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

When it companies the size of these, it SHOULD take a long while to do some careful scrutiny of the deal. Including the history of the companies involved and how they've acted historically in their respective markets, balancing the promises made with how such a merger would be a measurable net positive for consumers, and actual repercussions for failing to deliver promised measurements.

Rarely do mergers at such massive scale do anything except consolidate power and increase market domination. I would prefer it if regulating bodies took longer and considered more input during their evaluations and wouldn't mind hearing about more mega-mergers being denied.

 

I agree with you that more time should be taken to examine everything and that more of these mega-mergers should be stopped for numerous reasons, some of which you outlined. I think the length and how it'd affect Activision is an interesting detail that isn't talked about enough. Shows how much of a shock all of this has been to Microsoft/Activision because if they had any inkling it'd run into this much trouble then Starfield and whatever else would still be coming to PlayStation.

6 minutes ago, UNLEADED_BRONZE said:

FTC &/and SCEE/Sony joke 

Legend had it there still looking too/2 block it

 

Nintendo got a 10/Ten/X year COD contract

 

Hahahaha 

 

The endless evil empire of Sony has America wrapped around their finger yes. Small time Microsoft is helpless in the face of such overwhelming corruption.

 

Nor Nintendo or Valve have signed such a thing as far as it is known. A lot of incorrect reporting though so I don't blame you for getting that wrong.

Edited by Rozalia1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rozalia1 said:

I think the length and how it'd affect Activision is an interesting detail that isn't talked about enough. Shows how much of a shock all of this has been to Microsoft/Activision because if they had any inkling it'd run into this much trouble then Starfield and whatever else would still be coming to PlayStation.

 

Well if they thought the merger wouldn't have gone through, they probably wouldn't have pursued it like they did. Its also likely Activision is behind on development plans and thought the most prudent approach once the merger was proposed was to just focus on one version and apply all resources to that. Assuming "shock" is emotionalizing something that was likely just a business decision based on the information they had at the time and assumptions that were reasonable in the moment.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DaivRules said:

Well if they thought the merger wouldn't have gone through, they probably wouldn't have pursued it like they did. Its also likely Activision is behind on development plans and thought the most prudent approach once the merger was proposed was to just focus on one version and apply all resources to that. Assuming "shock" is emotionalizing something that was likely just a business decision based on the information they had at the time and assumptions that were reasonable in the moment.

 

I meant it getting through but taking many years to do so. Obviously they wouldn't try it if they felt it'd fail.

 

I don't think you're really disagreeing with me, just don't like my word usage. I've said myself in essence that they worked off the information at the time and assumptions reasonable in the moment, which were clearly that this would go through nice and quick. As such to me I would characterise what has happened as a shock. A surprise. A spanner in the works. How would you describe it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The deal shouldn’t go through because Microsoft could make cod and other games like it exclusive. People keep saying Microsoft promises to keep it on PlayStation but they did the same with Bethesda so unless there’s a way to guarantee it on all platforms they should stop it from going through but no matter the outcome I applaud Sony for trying.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CodGodFlame said:

The deal shouldn’t go through because Microsoft could make cod and other games like it exclusive. People keep saying Microsoft promises to keep it on PlayStation but they did the same with Bethesda so unless there’s a way to guarantee it on all platforms they should stop it from going through but no matter the outcome I applaud Sony for trying.

 

What does it matter if COD is Xbox/PC only? I have doubts that people here don't own at least a pc let alone an Xbox. You could run any COD on a pc from goodwill.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Z1MZUM said:

 

What does it matter if COD is Xbox/PC only? I have doubts that people here don't own at least a pc let alone an Xbox. You could run any COD on a pc from goodwill.

 

People want to play on PlayStation and others just wanna play it for the trophies plus I’ve played cod on PlayStation since Cod4 ps3 with thousands of hours in each game there’s no reason it should go exclusive. Imagine you can’t play a game because you chose the wrong piece of plastic that’s the dumbest thing ever Sony and Xbox should end exclusivity but they won’t because it’s good for business and You definitely can’t run cid on a good will pc  my 2017 PC can’t run the original Warzone without crashing or 3 second freezes across the entire game + on top of that not everyone has money to put $1000+ into a pc if people did a majority of the world would have good gaming pc.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will this 68.7m $ buyout/merge/infrastructure fail

Will the FTC ft/and/& SCEE/Sony 

Win this court case,If it happen in America/USA they would SUE MSFT/Act 

Merge or a counter SUE 

 

Was this Merge pointless now the EU/Europe is looking into it

 

Is there lessons too/2 be learnt?

 

 

 

Edited by UNLEADED_BRONZE
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Z1MZUM said:

I have doubts that people here don't own at least a pc let alone an Xbox. You could run any COD on a pc from goodwill.

 

Bruh, good luck running the latest cod on a $100 laptop. ?

 

To even spike this more, I know numerous people that don't even have a PC since they think they can do everything by phone.

Edited by Bumperklever
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, CodGodFlame said:

People want to play on PlayStation and others just wanna play it for the trophies plus I’ve played cod on PlayStation since Cod4 ps3 with thousands of hours in each game there’s no reason it should go exclusive. Imagine you can’t play a game because you chose the wrong piece of plastic that’s the dumbest thing ever Sony and Xbox should end exclusivity but they won’t because it’s good for business and You definitely can’t run cid on a good will pc  my 2017 PC can’t run the original Warzone without crashing or 3 second freezes across the entire game + on top of that not everyone has money to put $1000+ into a pc if people did a majority of the world would have good gaming pc.

 

Yeah maybe youtube how low you can go to run MW2 Roman Numeral 2 electric Boogooloo part 2

13 minutes ago, Bumperklever said:

 

Bruh, good luck running the latest cod on a $100 laptop. 1f602.png

 

To even spike this more, I know numerous people that don't even have a PC since they think they can do everything by phone.

 

Then they can't afford of justify a playstation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Alchemist said:

LOL 

 

Sounds like Spencer's "We're a small gaming company getting bullied by a massive evil corporation" set them off. I don't keep up with the person in the video but I recall Microsoft supporters mentioning them some time back and from their comments they weren't that hostile to it. The mentioning of the FTC trying to stop the deal and Sanders/Warren getting told they're ignorant for backing the FTC likely had a part in it too. The number of Microsoft supporters who normally would say they're against consolidation coming out of the woodwork and saying that this should go through because the law (which they've attacked as corrupt if Meta or whoever is involved) is the law is incredible. Just no shame.

 

3 hours ago, Z1MZUM said:

What does it matter if COD is Xbox/PC only? I have doubts that people here don't own at least a pc let alone an Xbox. You could run any COD on a pc from goodwill.

 

On top of that Microsoft's aim is to get going people using the cloud to game on everything. They'll get CoD on your fridge if it is capable. 

 

Microsoft shutting out PlayStation eventually (they'll likely play nice for a few years at least due to all the heat surrounding this) on CoD (everything else will be shut out instantly) is ultimately a small concern. The bigger concern, which the FTC knows about, is what comes after. Microsoft bought Bethesda and many other studios en masse with not even a peep from anybody, even Sony which Microsoft are trying to frame as an evil empire always trying to hold them down said nothing. Microsoft then went and spent x10 the amount on Activision and as they've said they will not stop there and will be buying more. As such this is where the Regulators/Sony/Google/Others need to make a stand against Microsoft. If Microsoft gets this through and possibly it'll happen once the Republicans make the FTC utterly powerless to stop anybody (why the CMA/EU is so important as they can kill this deal before then), then nothing stops Microsoft from simply continuing in a big way. Have you heard Microsoft and their supporters arguments? As long as Xbox doesn't become X% of gaming and thereby a monopoly then they should be able to buy up anybody. As Microsoft has loved to say to support their case, gaming is more than console gaming and mobile especially is very large. Once you frame yourself as a % of gaming as a whole and not simply console gaming then nothing would stop them snapping up even the likes of EA next as even with EA they'd not meet the threshold of a monopoly in gaming overall. In fact Microsoft could buy up all the major western publishers and they'd still likely not meet the threshold of a monopoly if the market is framed as I described.

 

Now granted, that is a lot of moolah even for Microsoft, but they could certainly manage it eventually. Something many people forget is that Microsoft ultimately is only losing money on whatever amount they're overpaying for these purchases. Beyond that they're just converting cash that they've made in their other businesses as Xbox is a mismanaged mess, into a money generating asset.

 

1 hour ago, Bumperklever said:

To even spike this more, I know numerous people that don't even have a PC since they think they can do everything by phone.

 

I have heard the talk that PCs are going to be an old fashioned thing in the future and people will just be using phones. We'll see if it actually happens in a big way.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the end of the day we as gamers have no reason to believe or trust anything that Microsoft or Sony do. The same is to be said about Activision though that business is an entire new level of greed and generally disgusting business practices. I mean sure it's ok to lie about sales etc etc etc, It's not fine to use dodgy algorithms which lead to nothing more then displeasure. I mean ffs the SBMM is that strong now that you're lucky to get a ping below 100 and if that doesn't work there are many other methods to knock you down a notch ranging from skill based hit detection to randomly getting throttled. Activisions vision is to see as many people as humanly possible playing there only game that is filled with bugs and identical in every way to their 2019 release. It always makes me laugh that the only thing that works consistently is the store. In short they want non gamer casuals to play their shit for a year and spend as much money on micro transactions as possible. Why would a business protect and white list known cheaters? Oh because they are popular on twitch? In fact how can a new game be full of aimbots? This cross platform play is working out real good except for the people that have spent 20 minutes playing one round only to get knocked out by pc cheater. People who play their only game (Cod) are fully aware of this and are hoping that MS can make some changes. If this game becomes pc/xb only it's a small trade off.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Z1MZUM said:

People who play their only game (Cod) are fully aware of this and are hoping that MS can make some changes. If this game becomes pc/xb only it's a small trade off.

 

The implications and ramifications of this are a lot bigger than COD itself, which seems to be the point you're missing given that you keep fixating on COD here.

Edited by Zephrese
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.ign.com/articles/microsoft-exec-says-xboxs-activision-deal-is-fair-because-playstation-has-way-more-exclusives

 

With Spencer having embarrassed Xbox lately now Brad Smith wants his turn.

 

Quote

"The FTC’s case is really based on a market that they’ve identified that they say has two companies and two products, Sony PlayStation and Microsoft Xbox," Smith said.


"If you look at the global market, Sony has 70% of that market, and we have 30%. So the first thing a judge is going to have to decide is whether the FTC lawsuit is a case that will promote competition or is it really instead of case that will protect the largest competitor from competition."

 

I see Microsoft has chosen today is "the market to look at here is just console gaming". Tomorrow we'll perhaps be back to "the market is gaming as a whole so we need to include everything". I wonder why a regulator is untrusting of Microsoft's analysis on this matter when they ping pong from two different definitions depending on whatever suits them in the moment.

 

Quote

Smith added that PlayStation has 286 exclusive games while Xbox only has 59. "So the administrative law judge is going to have to decide whether going from 59 to 60 is such a danger to competition that he should stop this from moving forward."

 

I'm laughing as I recall this in the CMA document and Xbox had their number of exclusives redacted out of embarrassment and here is Brad Smith just giving it away. I certainly recall Microsoft just throwing out the number and not naming games outside the obvious (God of War and the like), but I don't recall if they attached a time frame. On top of that you just know they're including the Stroke, Breakthrough, Jumping, and so forth series as Sony exclusives to pump the number up.

 

On top of that. Microsoft spends months saying CoD will not be exclusive. A case against Microsoft is them not being trusted. Brad Smith here saying that CoD being exclusive isn't a big deal as it is just one game. Indeed, there is also no such thing as scale. A judge will look at Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 and Donut Run and remark "yes, both of these are the same".

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zephrese said:

 

The implications and ramifications of this are a lot bigger than COD itself, which seems to be the point you're missing given that you keep fixating on COD here.

 

I get the point as I wasn't born yesterday, I just don't care what happens with Sony or Activision. Go to Activisions website and tell me what you see? Oh one game, One game that is miles behind many other competitive shooters. Did you know Splatoon 3 is more active?

 

Point, Don't give a toss about the collapse of "Insert brand name here" etc etc etc, do give a shit about quality games.

 

I guessed I missed that some see this as the end of gaming, lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Z1MZUM said:

I get the point as I wasn't born yesterday, I just don't care what happens with Sony or Activision.

 

You clearly don't, otherwise you wouldn't be repeating yourself over COD. And good for you, then, I guess?

Edited by Zephrese
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Z1MZUM said:

 

I get the point as I wasn't born yesterday, I just don't care what happens with Sony or Activision. Go to Activisions website and tell me what you see? Oh one game, One game that is miles behind many other competitive shooters. Did you know Splatoon 3 is more active?

 

One game IP that is a regular top 10 and blockbuster in sales, regardless of what you personally feel about its quality.  Try again

 

Also, are we conveniently ignoring overwatch and diablo?

Edited by AJ_-_808
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, AJ_-_808 said:

 

One game IP that is a regular top 10 and blockbuster in sales, regardless of what you personally feel about its quality.  Try again

 

Also, are we conveniently ignoring overwatch and diablo?

 

 

Lol ok, That's like me saying did you conveniently forget that I couldn't care less which platform Activision games are released on. 

 

And no you try again, you're blind if you believe Activision and it's sales. Cod Mobile and WZ both free games make the majority of these so called sales.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Z1MZUM said:

 

 

Lol ok, That's like me saying did you conveniently forget that I couldn't care less which platform Activision games are released on. 

 

And no you try again, you're blind if you believe Activision and it's sales. Cod Mobile and WZ both free games make the majority of these so called sales.

 

You said 1 game.  Acti owns Blizzard, so that's more than 1.

 

Are you seriously arguing about the sheer volume of sales (this includes dlc, micro transactions, merch, product sponsorships, etc) call of duty makes?  

 

You may not care which platform it's on, but if it becomes exclusive, the many people that play it religiously will care, and they'll move to that platform.  Add in Bethesda's elder scrolls, Fallout etc, and whatever else  MS plans to buy because they can't make their own shit, and it will affect the bottom line to a certain degree.  You're deluded if you think otherwise.

 

Xbox never lost anything to ps home-grown exclusives, because they never had those to begin with. Ps loses when xbox throws around MS money to buy long-time multi platform publishers.  

 

You're doing a lot of arguing over something you claim not to care about

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, AJ_-_808 said:

You said 1 game.  Acti owns Blizzard, so that's more than 1.

 

Are you seriously arguing about the sheer volume of sales (this includes dlc, micro transactions, merch, product sponsorships, etc) call of duty makes?  

 

You may not care which platform it's on, but if it becomes exclusive, the many people that play it religiously will care, and they'll move to that platform.  Add in Bethesda's elder scrolls, Fallout etc, and whatever else  MS plans to buy because they can't make their own shit, and it will affect the bottom line to a certain degree.  You're deluded if you think otherwise.

 

Xbox never lost anything to ps home-grown exclusives, because they never had those to begin with. Ps loses when xbox throws around MS money to buy long-time multi platform publishers.  

 

You're doing a lot of arguing over something you claim not to care about

 

I'm not arguing, I like everyone here including you.

 

People may not to be able to play on Playstation but what do they miss out on in the current environment? Shitty games?. There's a loss no matter which way this goes. Imo the only way is improvements.

Edited by Z1MZUM
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Z1MZUM said:

 

I'm not arguing, I like everyone here including you.

 

People may not to be able to play on Playstation but what do they miss out on in the current environment? Shitty games?. There's a loss no matter which way this goes. Imo the only way is improvements.

Nobody is debating the quality of call of duty, or the other games (again, a matter of opinion), but there's no denying their overall popularity.  

 

Skyrim, Fallout, Call of duty, overwatch,  etc individually aren't necessarily enough to have a massive death-blow impact on console sales.  Combined, however, plus MS's next target (let's be real, they stated they have no intention of stopping) will certainly have a landscape changing impact.

 

EA saw the Activision buyout offer and is now looking to get one too.  Ubisoft is open to offers.  WBgaming is looking to sell studios and license IPs.  If MS additionally takes call of duty, overwatch, Diablo, fifa, madden, Battlefield, assassin's creed, farcry, mortal kombat, batman, Harry potter etc as exclusives, that WILL be severely damaging.  Each of those are popular IPs, regardless of their subjective quality.

 

MS's history and future intentions (both stated and implied) are very much at the heart of the debate.

Edited by AJ_-_808
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope this doesn't go through so all parties involved lose some money, Antivision hasn't made a good game since Transformers Fall Of Cybertron, they need to pay for what they did to High Moon Studios, and MS needs to get out of gaming, it doesn't matter how much money they throw away to buy their way into gaming, they have achieved nothing and they will achieve nothing that is lasting, xbox as a home console of 1st party AAA gaming is a thing of the past, all it is now is a cheap gamepass fodder games machine with the Series S

Edited by The Investigator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, The Investigator said:

I hope thies doesn't go through so all parties involved lose some money, Antivision hasn't made a good game since Transformers Fall Of Cybertron, they need to pay for what they did to High Moon Studios, and MS needs to get out of gaming, it doesn't matter how much money they throw away to buy their way into gaming, they have achieved nothing and they will achieve nothing that is lasting, xbox as a home console of 1st party AAA gaming is a thing of the past, all it is now is a cheap gamepass fodder games machine with the Series S

I don't think MS or any other company cares. It's a business and the whole talk about achieving something lasting is similar to saying "PCs have no soul" (with the assumption that consoles or games on them have one) - it's just as meaningless. Personally, as a user of both consoles, putting all of the corporate mumbo Jumbo aside, I hope the deal goes through because it will simply be cheaper for me as a gamer. I don't care about Sony or MS, I care for what is better for me. 

And tbh, if one is interested in Acti, Bethesda or any other MS-bought companies' games and buys games at launch - a cost of few of those covers the cost of an Xbox with those games in a (so far) cheap game pass. It's not like playing them is out of anyone's reach, especially with the Series S. 

 

Not trying to by a devil's advocate on a trophy website, just how I see it personally. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...