Wouldn't be hard to argue that 10 years is not enough time to make a franchise that size.
Microsoft's acquisition of Activison Blizzard
- Thread starter Darth Vader
- Start date
Yup, plenty of evidence out there showing either sony and ms could not dislodge cod after 20 years.
No, now THAT would be an actual monopolistic purchase. Steam has, I'd guess, at least 80% of the PC gaming player base, but Valve earned that market share over the years by building up the platform and providing the content people wanted (well, by providing the infrastructure and storefront features developers & publishers wanted which then appealed to gamers on PC).
Microsoft acquiring Steam or even Valve would literally just be them buying their way to an absolute majority of the PC gaming market share. It shouldn't matter if they make "promises" to leave things as they are: the point is that they are BUYING their way to this market share and in the case of Steam, easily the largest gaming market share on the PC. The way in which they are attempting to gain that market share, that user and data access, THAT should be what gets such a deal shut down right from the get-go, especially considering it would be something of Steam's size.
There's no way I would want to support a company trying to eat their way through markets like a hungry, hungry hippo. I've already resigned myself to the idea of picking up a Series X or S, and I'm seriously considering switching from Windows to some form of Linux. A timeline where MS goes to buy Valve/Steam after already acquiring Zenimax and ABK would 100% seal that deal for me, considering they are also pushing full steam ahead on ChatGPT which will have negative effects on the workforce before any meaningful regulation or legislation can be implemented to prevent massive corporations from abusing its usage.
I usually don't talk about law when I'm talking about video games because, well, you know, gamers generally don't care for that kind of crap. And I'm not head-first in the world of law outside of that so no I've had no need nor interest to visit websites like it.
Not sure if this is proof of anything, but it seems Thomson Reuters (parent company of Reuters) and Blackstone entered an agreement to sell shares of London Stock Exchange to Microsoft late last year
So they have at least done business with Microsoft in selling LSEG shares co-owned between them (Thomson Reuters) and Blackstone. Due to the sale of those shares, Microsoft gained a 4.2% stake in the London Stock Exchange...which Thomson Reuters itself owns a lot of shares in.
This might at least prove there are financial incentives in some of these Reuters reports to big up Microsoft in these acquisition proceedings.
Turns out you might be surprised x3.
Granted, I'm only referring to Thomson Reuters (parent organization that owns Reuters) selling LSEG shares to Microsoft and making Microsoft a minority shareholder in the London Stock Exchange...but that's still a form of money changing hands, and establishes a relationship between the two where anything that benefits Microsoft, IMO would benefit Thomson Reuters and anything Thomson Reuters owns, such as Reuters.
MS paying a 3P to monitor the deal is bound to end up in failure. Who vets the 3P, is it just Microsoft? Do the CMA vet them as well? What are the criteria to determine they're trustworthy? How often will the 3P need to be re-vetted during the 10 year period?
Hell what's to prevent Microsoft from throwing a few moneybag bonuses to this 3P if it can mean certain aspects of the deal conveniently not getting enforced? What are fines to Microsoft if they do such a thing? Can they contest the fines? Ignore them?
Way too many things can go screwy.
Last edited:
Amazing how Idas always has the best possible outcome for Microsoft. Ive noticed on here, gaf, and twitter the discussion is microsoft admitting to taking cod off playstation after 10 years but not a peep of that is in the resetera thread. Goes to show how much an echochamber that place is now that theyve chased off or banned all dissenting voices.
There's too much money going behind the scenes on Era...
Not surprised, he was feeding people at the possibility of CMA approving without remedies. How'd that turn out?
That's a very optimistic reading of the CMA's behavior imo. Listening to MS on these remedies does not mean that they've been convinced that they will work.
I would also say that since MS have already said that they refuse divestiture, why would they waste time talking about it with them?
Last edited:
Yes, though he seems to be very partial to Microsoft in this case and is catering to a pro-MS audience on that forum.
Last edited:
Hes a microsft employee LARPing as a forum poster on website that bans any and all dissent of the deal (probably because theres been money exchanged on the back end) so said microsoft employee (Idas) can frame and shape all discussion of the deal to make microsoft look best at all times while the mods ban anyone too critical. My guess is Microsoft wants someone who seems "official" but also "one of us" gamers who post on forums but needs it to be an extremely controlled environment so dissenters cant ask too many questions or bring up too good a talking point against the deal. Idas, who has no known credentials, couldnt LARP as lawyer without scrutiny on twitter or any forum that doesnt allow heavy handed moderation like resetera does.
I guess in so few words what im trying to say is resetera is the safe space a microsoft employee is allowed to frame and shape the narrative while the shills, astroturfers and fanboys spread the misinformation twitter and other places. All in my opinion of course!
D
Deleted member 417
Guest
FWIW Microsoft did this on Neogaf in 2013/2014. Albert Penello had an account on there and was trying to convince the forum that the power of the cloud was real and that the new DX update would add 30% of power to the Xbone.
Unfortunately for Albert, there were many tech geeks on there at the time, and he got ripped to shreds over his lies. Those tech geeks were eventually banned, never to be seen again.
So yeah, it wouldn't be something new for Microsoft to drop their own people on a Microsoft-safe forum to shape the narrative.
I think thats EXACTLY whats happening. Im not saying Idas is ALbert Penello, but is he a microsoft lawyer? Probably.
I'm glad I got banned from that place. The amount of hate for japanese games not made by capcom and the shilling for MS is disgusting.
It's crazy companies like EA have tried for years and still couldn't, and EA have way more expertise in FPS.
So there expecting sony to do it in 10 with no studios who even do fps? And im not counting bungie in this, they may have a bit of autonomy and sony may not just be able to push them to do a cod competitor.
I also don't think they understand how hard it is to get a Game out every year with content updates
Isn't like 8 studios working that they could make a game a year? PS can't deligate 8 studios to make one series, not at least now.