Have they not already ruined enough,
No they shouldn't be allowed if you're a PC gamer (or gamer in general who loves fairytales of market "balance") but MS should have bought them a long time ago. So No and Yes...
I think it irked MS initially and greatly that Gabe became an established middle man on a platform MS built, and I'm sure they're envious of Apple and Google (and Sony etc) in this regard (platform control) but I think they've come to an acceptance phase a long time ago as it poses no threat to the Windows ecosystem buy-in wise.... just cuts down their potential revenue out of every Windows license there is. You can clearly see MS has tried to correct this with Windows Live, Windows Store, and now Gamepass but they continue to miss the mark (call this the soft approach). The obvious solution would be the hard approach - to pony up and buy Valve for an outrageous price, then battle regulators. The goal being of course consolidation for the Windows platform, greater control, lesser potential for external threats. and maximization of potential profit margins per Windows license.
Obviously we may never know how many MS attempts have been made to acquire Valve and how far those attempts got. I think MS has begrudgingly become OK with the status quo and prefers to allocate resources to battle other competitors at their turf (bring the battle to them if you will - Sony and Nintendo being more vulnerable (Xbox) than say Apple or Google with the failed Windows Phone ventures).
I do agree that there is a potential benefit of MS acquiring Valve - MS will turn it to shit eventually, but not before trying to fuck up the industry in all sorts of ways. So if you believe in zero sum, strategically it's beneficial for console makers and platforms to have an incompetent manager heading Valve - as a calculated "the end justify the means'" risk. I wouldn't set that much weight to regulators blocking the deal but that is just a superficial take for the time being.
I think it irked MS initially and greatly that Gabe became an established middle man on a platform MS built, and I'm sure they're envious of Apple and Google (and Sony etc) in this regard (platform control) but I think they've come to an acceptance phase a long time ago as it poses no threat to the Windows ecosystem buy-in wise.... just cuts down their potential revenue out of every Windows license there is. You can clearly see MS has tried to correct this with Windows Live, Windows Store, and now Gamepass but they continue to miss the mark (call this the soft approach). The obvious solution would be the hard approach - to pony up and buy Valve for an outrageous price, then battle regulators. The goal being of course consolidation for the Windows platform, greater control, lesser potential for external threats. and maximization of potential profit margins per Windows license.
Obviously we may never know how many MS attempts have been made to acquire Valve and how far those attempts got. I think MS has begrudgingly become OK with the status quo and prefers to allocate resources to battle other competitors at their turf (bring the battle to them if you will - Sony and Nintendo being more vulnerable (Xbox) than say Apple or Google with the failed Windows Phone ventures).
I do agree that there is a potential benefit of MS acquiring Valve - MS will turn it to shit eventually, but not before trying to fuck up the industry in all sorts of ways. So if you believe in zero sum, strategically it's beneficial for console makers and platforms to have an incompetent manager heading Valve - as a calculated "the end justify the means'" risk. I wouldn't set that much weight to regulators blocking the deal but that is just a superficial take for the time being.
Last edited:
For sure, they would be a great acquisition for MS, Sony or Tencent. Each one of these companies would be happy to buy them but regulators would block it.
Because Valve already has most of the PC market, and adding the part they already have MS would have basically a monopoly in PC. To Sony they'd block it because they are market leaders in console, game subs and now that would also would make them market leaders in PC and would strength them in high end VR. And Tencent well, they already are market leaders in gaming and that would make the distance way bigger.
Because Valve already has most of the PC market, and adding the part they already have MS would have basically a monopoly in PC. To Sony they'd block it because they are market leaders in console, game subs and now that would also would make them market leaders in PC and would strength them in high end VR. And Tencent well, they already are market leaders in gaming and that would make the distance way bigger.
ffs stop asking for shit to be bought out
OP
OP
Deleted member 417
Guest
This is just a topic of discussion. No one wants it to happen.
The reason I posted the thread was to get people to discuss Microsoft strategy and how, hypothetically, a Valve purchase would fit into their strategy. No fanboy feeling or anything other than looking at this from a pure business perspective
Damn, when u put it that way they d be perfect target for sony lol. I forgot they have VR segment along with steam deck.
MS store tries are way different from Steam and that is why they failed.
MS buying Steam will only make MS Store madatory to all PC gamers... yeap Steam will become exactly like MS Store.
Do you want that?
I don't like Steam myself because I think they have tons of things to evolve in their Store but compared with EGS and MS Store they are decades ahead.
MS buying Steam will only make MS Store madatory to all PC gamers... yeap Steam will become exactly like MS Store.
Do you want that?
I don't like Steam myself because I think they have tons of things to evolve in their Store but compared with EGS and MS Store they are decades ahead.
how about? they buy nothing and slowly went out of the gaming business? how about that?
Is MS lefting gaming business a better ideia?
Most of it "ideias" harmed more gamers than helped to build a better game industry.
Should we not be better without MS today?
Most of it "ideias" harmed more gamers than helped to build a better game industry.
Should we not be better without MS today?
Their strategy of buying the entire games industry getting blocked will hopefully speed this outcome up exponentially. It’s poetic that a rental service of their own making filled with self trained freeloaders is ultimately going to take them out. Sorry not sorry!
The real thing standing in the way of a Valve buyout is that they are either privately held or enough key stock holders always act as one that they might as well be. I don't know if there'd be legal blocks to any of them buying Valve/Steam, with the lone exception of Tencent for so-called "national security" reasons which basically amount to political dislike of China.
Valve is rather unique and doesn't really have direct competitors except Epic. So, yeah, Epic probably wouldn't be allowed to buy them.
Edit: Actually, they have a VR platform too, maybe Meta would be blocked too (oh lord, imagine the salt if Facebook brought Valve and started force-integrating it into their existing ecosystem.) How many viable VR platforms do there need to be before they can start buying eachother?
Valve is rather unique and doesn't really have direct competitors except Epic. So, yeah, Epic probably wouldn't be allowed to buy them.
Edit: Actually, they have a VR platform too, maybe Meta would be blocked too (oh lord, imagine the salt if Facebook brought Valve and started force-integrating it into their existing ecosystem.) How many viable VR platforms do there need to be before they can start buying eachother?
OP
OP
Deleted member 417
Guest
I've updated the OP to clarify that this isn't something I want.
I was hoping it would generate a discussion on the pros/cons of filling the gaps (handheld, PC, VR) of Xbox to line up with MS' larger strategy.
I was hoping it would generate a discussion on the pros/cons of filling the gaps (handheld, PC, VR) of Xbox to line up with MS' larger strategy.
Well, Gamepass is their PC strategy, handhelds as a concept are dead and VR is a niche not worth being in, so there you go.
It's not about if it's bad for Microsoft. It would literally be a monopolistic purchase. Steam has more than 80% of the PC gaming userbase...it's probably closer to 90% if I had to guess. But Valve earned that market share by serving the market for well over a decade and providing a product customers chose to support.
Microsoft would simply be buying their way to those customers and their data. It's a clear-cut case of a company buying their way to majority market share and regulators would shut that down in a heartbeat.
If you want Microsoft to be more competitive on PC, just ask them to put forward a better effort with their own products. You know, actual competition.
is this directed at the op or the post above you.
