Microsoft's acquisition of Activison Blizzard

[Swift_Star]

I think his wife will divorce him if the acquisition fails

I can’t even understand what this means.

 

[Swift_Star]

Unless I missed something, I’m surprised Microsoft hasn’t said something today. I figured they would have at least put out a fiery statement or something.

They are drowning their tears in expensive whisky and licking their wounds during it.
There’s nothing else they can do.

 

[ksdixon]

no ones didnt even knew this site existed 1 hour ago. i was on gaff with the name

seems like u have issues so piss off

Well then... that's an introduction lol.
I'm gonna enjoy the next few pages I think.

 

[laynelane]

I generally agree very much about Sony's professionalism throughout this, and not taking the reality TV, tabloid-fueled approach that Microsoft and their supporters have increasingly done since late last year. And as you've said, just bearing the brunt of mostly unfair criticism and attacks against them when it turns out they were right on the money about resisting the acquisition. They probably saw it as, if MS get ABK, they'll go after other publishers (and Satya Nadella in fact said they "weren't done" shortly after announcing the ABK deal. That aged well, didn't it?) and that constrains our working relationship with 3P partners if our direct competitor is in control of the contracts, the cash flow, the talent, the IP, the infrastructure, the distribution of that content.

BUT I don't think any of that means Sony haven't considered a publisher acquisition or two of their own. They might still be considering one and, at the end of the day, whoever gets one, that's still consolidation. However I think it's safe to say, we have historical evidence of Sony handling their gaming acquisitions MUCH better than Microsoft have theirs, in terms of both working with those companies prior to acquisition and then growing them to reach even higher once they've been acquired.

So on principal of what an acquisition the size of ABK could mean for further industry consolidation, I would still be against it on said grounds. However, I'd at least of been a lot more hopeful of actual studio cultural changes and increased creative output & polish if Sony were the ones making that acquisition, just going off past precedent. But that would only be a small consolation in what would still be a troubling, large-scale gaming acquisition resulting in a notable consolidation (and shrinkage of the 3P market).

Can't rule out Sony attempting for a publisher themselves in the near future, though obviously would be much smaller than ABK, or even something like EA or Take Two. Also more likely it would be a Japanese publisher rather than an American or European one; their acquisitions on those last two fronts have been pretty much focused on independent studios, most with no IP attached to them (Bungie is the sole exception). If/when they do, though, at least we know they would handle it much better than Microsoft have handled the ABK deal, that's for sure.

I think buying developers can be considered a normal part of this industry. Publishers not so much. The way I see it, Sony and MS have very different ways of going about this and goals too. Sony invests in and purchases developers that they see potential in or already have a relationship with, for the most part. We've seen a lot of great games come out through this method and original IP. Even with their Bungie purchase, it was about strengthening the brand - they get Bungie's knowledge and expertise with GAAS games. Some people like to make jokes about organic growth, but it really has been so far. Developers are purchased not only for what they create and their knowledge, but also for how that can strengthen the company as a whole.

I don't see that with MS. You already know my thoughts on this. Their acquisitions are designed with a very different goal in mind. Look at how many titles have already been removed from other platforms. And now we know how ABK and their plans for Cloud gaming fit into all this. With MS, it's not about enriching the industry or strengthening XBox - it's about control and the initial steps to establishing yet another monopoly. This is a company that, at this point, will cause nothing but harm to the gaming industry. And we all know they couldn't care less about the industry or gamers, as well. It's solely about control and money.

WIth Sony and Nintendo, I get that they're in it to make money but I also get the sense they care about games. I don't get that at all with MS. People say they need to change their leadership to someone who can put out games. I agree but, even more importantly, they need leadership who love games. Because, right now, they have absolutely no one like that in charge.

As well, I get what you're saying about consolidation. I would also say it's a natural part of the business - after all, it's happened before and will happen again. It's just a company like MS consolidating an industry is always and has always been a bad sign for fair competition and consumer choice.

Edit: I also agree with your thoughts on Sony purchasing a publisher and why it's potentially less troublesome. It shouldn't be ruled out, but we'll have to wait and see on that.

 

[Loy310]

Lolllllllll
View attachment 1239

lolzzzz, that dude cant take ms dick out his mouth.

 

[Cool hand luke]

Looks like the only thing that was defanged was Redfall. The CMA's powers grew. Shout out to the idiots who thought Microsoft had this in the bag (and still do!)

 

[Dabaus]

Looks like the only thing that was defanged was Redfall. The CMA's powers grew. Shout out to the idiots who thought Microsoft had this in the bag (and still do!)

Here's to you bud

 

[Puff]

Game on as UK steals a march on Brussels over Activision merger

The Competition & Markets Authority’s decision to block the planned $68.7 billion merger between the tech giant Microsoft and the games maker Activision will h

www.thetimes.co.uk

In blocking a tie-up that was on course to get the green light in Brussels, the CMA's decision on Microsoft/Activision defies neuralgic European fears that a post-Brexit UK would inevitably morph into "Singapore-on-Thames", undercutting the EU's standards at every turn to steal business and investment from the bloc.

By contrast, Brussels merger rules are still dictated by a conservative framework that prioritises the here and now impact on consumers, rather than foreseeing the threat of future monopolies.

A recent study found that the Brussels competition unit relies on a small band of external economic consultancies who lobby on behalf of their corporate clients on merger and competition decisions. The European Commission is also poised to appoint a former Obama-era enforcer who had side jobs consulting Amazon and Apple as its chief competition economist. Both US giants have been the subject of antitrust and state-aid tax investigations in recent years.

One EU official says the CMA's disruptive decisions are causing "fear and resentment" in Brussels.

The dreaded divergence can work both ways, then. Despite an understandable fixation on "perfidious Albion", Brussels and EU capitals failed to account for the strength of the UK's system of independent regulators, which can act as a bulwark against the deregulatory instincts of governments and, in the CMA's case, gazump the EU in the process.

"The UK is getting way ahead of the European Commission on mergers," Zach Meyers, research fellow at the Centre for European Reform, says. Influential member states such as France talk tough on tech companies but Brussels' powerful competition authority remains gripped by old orthodoxies when deciding on multinational mergers in the digital sector.

 

[AshHunter216]

Game on as UK steals a march on Brussels over Activision merger

The Competition & Markets Authority’s decision to block the planned $68.7 billion merger between the tech giant Microsoft and the games maker Activision will h

www.thetimes.co.uk

Interesting how the EU are the ones heavily influenced by corporate lobbying. It looks like the cma model has the right idea.

 

[riesgoyfortuna]

 

[TwistedSyn]

When is this idiot gonna learn when to STFU.

 

[daniel5043]

Interesting how the EU are the ones heavily influenced by corporate lobbying. It looks like the cma model has the right ideas

So much more easier to corrupt when your not a proper singular country

 

[Swift_Star]

Game on as UK steals a march on Brussels over Activision merger

The Competition & Markets Authority’s decision to block the planned $68.7 billion merger between the tech giant Microsoft and the games maker Activision will h

www.thetimes.co.uk

In the end, CMA is right.

Interesting how the EU are the ones heavily influenced by corporate lobbying. It looks like the cma model has the right idea.

Lobbying should absolutely be illegal.

 

[Dabaus]

I don’t like using this guy as a source for anything but, Nintendo is now getting dragged into the circus that is the Xbox division. I wonder if they regret it now?

 

[Eternal_Wings]

I don’t like using this guy as a source for anything but, Nintendo is now getting dragged into the circus that is the Xbox division. I wonder if they regret it now?

Honestly I can imagine that Nintendo knew about how shady this 10-years contracts are. They probably wanted to contribute their part, in order to help screwing Sony. If this is true, then if Sony should really buy Square Enix they should exclude Nintendo from Dragon Quest for the good.

 

[AshHunter216]

I don’t like using this guy as a source for anything but, Nintendo is now getting dragged into the circus that is the Xbox division. I wonder if they regret it now?

Yeah, Foss Patents will put a dishonest spin on things so I don't like him as a source either.

 

[AshHunter216]

Why is it that the vast majority of the information and commentary on this whole ABK thing comes from sources that are biased towards Microsoft and directly benefit from the success of the deal? Why have no anti-deal lawyers/analysts or even neutral ones spoken much? Are they that afraid of a mob on twitter?

 

[rofif]

What a bunch of shit xbox Damage Control from Digital foundry(latest podcast). They talk about cma for 10 minutes and then 14 minutes about "green energy" program from xbox. Rich said xbox asked him to talk about their energy gains and he sat down with a director to discuss it. They are deep in bed with Xbox.... damage control with "look how green we are" to cover their shit show

As example they say "if you pause halo infinite, the game runs in the background and we can lower the clock then" Like.... it is a fail by itself if a game is using 100% of the gpu in pause menu

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

I don’t like using this guy as a source for anything but, Nintendo is now getting dragged into the circus that is the Xbox division. I wonder if they regret it now?

Good. Historically, Nintendo are actually arguably the most "anti-consumer" and anti-competitive platform holder ever, people just try to forget the past. They had actual monopolistic contracts with almost all of the big 3P devs/pubs (particularly Japanese ones) in the NES/Famicom era. For all the stuff some jaded people like to throw at Sony for supposedly keeping games off Xbox, it's nothing compared to what Nintendo actually did/enforced with the NES/Famicom. Should ask SEGA and NEC how that felt.

Those contracts didn't even begin to soften until around the beginning years of the Super Famicom/SNES; in that context it's a miracle companies like SEGA were able to gain any traction in the gaming market but they couldn't rely on the big Japanese devs/pubs to do it because of Nintendo's contracts. And someone else ITT mentioned about Nintendo's part in the Congressional hearings of the early '90s that almost screwed over the whole industry, and they testified against SEGA just for optics and to hurt Genesis/MegaDrive sales (it didn't work). Even when a lot of industry players came together to form the ESRB, Nintendo were notably absent.

So them agreeing to MS's bogus 10-year contract for COD doesn't surprise me. And now they get to "have fun" in this circus, too .

Spoiler

For all the stuff I just said, though, I still like Nintendo platforms and they've made some of my favorite games of all time. I'm purely talking about some of their historical business practices that a lot of Nintendo fans either pretend never happened or aren't aware of actually having happened.

 

[Dabaus]

Why is it that the vast majority of the information and commentary on this whole ABK thing comes from sources that are biased towards Microsoft and directly benefit from the success of the deal? Why have no anti-deal lawyers/analysts or even neutral ones spoken much? Are they that afraid of a mob on twitter?

Every other company wants to be professional and not drag this into the public. Remember the only time playstation said anything public was calling Phil out on his 3 year lies. No one even knew google, and others, were also officially against this deal until this year. Microosft for whatever reason decided to take this public on twitter and seems to be backfiring.