Microsoft acquired Activision Blizzard King for $69 Billion on 2023-10-13

[wco81]

Big Tech doesn't speak out against them. They tend to donate to the Democrats though.

But their complaint is that some conservatives were banned from Twitter because they were spreading disinformation or engaging in hate speech.

Among the people whose account was canceled but Musk restored the account is some big time neo Nazi.

Now Twitter is trending towards becoming Parler or some other cesspool.

 

[BRiT]

Big Tech doesn't speak out against them.

I'm talking about how they [GOP] perceive it. That is all. Nothing tied to actual reality.

 

[Dr. Nick]

SCOTUS is definitely friendly to big business.

So if it reached the SCOTUS, it would likely be a good sign for the merger.

But big merger cases or breakups of big conglomerates rarely do.

The AT&T breakup didn't go to the SCOTUS and other big merger cases didn't.

Don't assume Republican president would necessarily be more receptive to mergers. Trump wanted to stop an AT&T merger to acquire Warner Brothers because WB owned CNN, which he hated.

But really, people want Republicans back in charge in Washington, when they've been horrible on tech issues (net neutrality gone or any of the number of things done under Republican FCC chairmen like Ajit Pai?).

That's some loyalty to a console company.

No...I'm hoping some how it makes it's way into court. Too bad Microsoft does not have the ability to counter-sue.

 

[Dr. Nick]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1600983255666200578

Well that's not June.

 

[Dr. Nick]

Has anyone pointed out that the FTC put Nintendo into a sperate market by saying the market for "high performance video gaming console"? So even they don't consider Nintendo part of the same market. My problem with that is that every multiplatform game that is released that has a Switch version likely has an impact on all other versions. Same market IMO.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1601004627411226625

 

[Silent_Buddha]

Keep in mind the current head of the FTC has one goal and one goal only. Prevent mergers and acquisitions by large companies. Nothing else matters compared to that.

Labor? Nope. If it means preventing an acquisition or merger, screw labor. Activision seeks to prevent the formation of a labor union. Microsoft won't stand in the way of a labor union forming.

Consumers? Nope. If it means preventing an acquisition or merger, screw consumers. ABK games will be available to more consumers after the acquisition. Doesn't matter.

Competition? Nope. If it means preventing an acquisition or merger, help a corporation maintain their market dominance and protect the larger market player.

Thus they will try to control and shape the narrative to attempt to make that happen. So far they've failed for the most part, but they'll keep trying.

Regards,
SB

 

[eastmen]

Seems like FTC is has MS as a gotcha with respect to the EUs understanding of the Bethesda merger.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1600983772018593793

https://twitter.com/x/status/1600983776774877184

https://twitter.com/x/status/1600983782672068608

The the people involved with both the EU and FTC are dumb since everything is spelt out clear as day from microsoft's communications with the EU. They said they would honor existing contracts and keep existing games and games contracted to come out on playstation and so far they have. Starfield was never announced or contracted to be released on playstation and thus MS has kept its word. This would never hold up in a court room and that is why the FTC isn't taking it to court.

If the EU expected something else then they need to fire anyone involved with oversight and get new people in that can read.

FTC is just grasping at straws. But Ms donates a lot to democrats and I am sure MS will start reaching out to all those it donates to and start to say hey we got 3B on this line that wont be going into democrat's campaign funds

 

[wco81]

What happens to the EU and UK regulators, do they just hold off and wait to see how the FTC case turns out?

Even if MS and FTC compromised and came to an agreement, EU and UK may still oppose the deal?

 

[BRiT]

What happens to the EU and UK regulators, do they just hold off and wait to see how the FTC case turns out?

No. They still need to follow and finish their regulatory processes.

 

[Jay]

Starfield was never announced or contracted to be released on playstation and thus MS has kept its word. This would never hold up in a court room and that is why the FTC isn't taking it to court.

To be clear I believe everyone involved in gaming understood, and excepted game by game and nothing stands up but.....
There's the one line that went something like "future multi platform games will come to competing consoles"
If they saw internal documents that Starfield & Redfall had PS versions in development (which at least Starfield did) then easy to make the leap/expect that it should come out on PS.

 

[Nesh]

Has anyone pointed out that the FTC put Nintendo into a sperate market by saying the market for "high performance video gaming console"? So even they don't consider Nintendo part of the same market. My problem with that is that every multiplatform game that is released that has a Switch version likely has an impact on all other versions. Same market IMO.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1601004627411226625

There is an overlap of content and customers but Switch's success/demand isnt based on the same merits.
Proof of that? Sales data. Whereas PS4 and XBOX One were losing steam as they reached their saturation, the weaker Switch (even compared to the previous Sony and MS consoles) continued and continues to sell like hotcakes with its most selling games not being the same type of games that make PS5 and XBOX Series the main drive force of being sought.

Note what the text says. HI-PERFORMANCE VIDEO GAME CONSOLES
Switch is NOT one of them and does not compete and a lot of new games will never be released on the Switch and it doesnt need them. Its a different kind of proposal than XBOX and PS.

 

[eastmen]

To be clear I believe everyone involved in gaming understood, and excepted game by game and nothing stands up but.....
There's the one line that went something like "future multi platform games will come to competing consoles"
If they saw internal documents that Starfield & Redfall had PS versions in development (which at least Starfield did) then easy to make the leap/expect that it should come out on PS.

It's a long shot since neither were announced as multiplatform and and redfal wasn't even announced until after the purchase. release platforms change all the time. Just look at Gotham knights up until like 6 months before launch it was cross generational.

I also highly doubt that Zenimax even had a contract yet for either game with any of the console makers since it was still so far out. Even when star field got announced that was 2018 4 years before it was even going to be released and before the announcement of the ps5 and xbox series consoles. Also Ms said they would meet contract obligations so if there was a contract with sony to release starfield they would have done so.

 

[iroboto]

I

There is an overlap of content and customers but Switch's success/demand isnt based on the same merits.
Proof of that? Sales data. Whereas PS4 and XBOX One were losing steam as they reached their saturation, the weaker Switch (even compared to the previous Sony and MS consoles) continued and continues to sell like hotcakes with its most selling games not being the same type of games that make PS5 and XBOX Series the main drive force of being sought.

Note what the text says. HI-PERFORMANCE VIDEO GAME CONSOLES
Switch is NOT one of them and does not compete and a lot of new games will never be released on the Switch and it doesnt need them. Its a different kind of proposal than XBOX and PS.

in the history of consoles, I’ve never seen in the console land something called hi performance and low performance consoles. It’s the first I’ve ever seen it. Next Gen and last Gen, mobile and handheld sure. But It’s pretty shit to see as a long time gamer, and to invent it for this purpose to side step an argument is weak.

We should not be applauding such weak arguments.

 

[PSman1700]

Hi-performance, lol. New terms for the console space, where does the XSS land according to sony? PS4, oneS?
Their stabbing Nintendo however the switch sold more than the ps4, which automatically means more than the ps5 aswell.

With introducing new performance terms, were bound to see an eventual mid gen refresh with some intresting naming schemes. In the console space a mid gen could be called ’higher-performance’ perhaps, with a stab at vanilla ps5 owners to make them upgrade.
’Hi-performance’ 10TF no rt/ml acceleration with a mere 3.5ghz clocked zen2. Mid gen going to be ’entusiast-performance’ 20tf/4.5ghz zen4’ perhaps.

 

[Nesh]

I

in the history of consoles, I’ve never seen in the console land something called hi performance and low performance consoles. It’s the first I’ve ever seen it. Next Gen and last Gen, mobile and handheld sure. But It’s pretty shit to see as a long time gamer, and to invent it for this purpose to side step an argument is weak.

We should not be applauding such weak arguments.

You are trying to grasp on straws right now. You know perfectly well that PS5 and XS consoles are considered next gen, more powerful and are the major selling point. You know very well what that means and how Nintendo differentiates itself. Lets not pretend.

 

[iroboto]

You are trying to grasp on straws right now. You know perfectly well that PS5 and XS consoles are considered next gen, more powerful and are the major selling point. You know very well what that means and how Nintendo differentiates itself. Lets not pretend.

No. You are trying to grasp at straws. Games have always been an art form, as we saw in the VGAs more games are and will be adopting anime or cell shaded graphics because it works for those games. These games stay timeless in look and still appeal to a wide range of audiences. Game developers know their technical budget and are have always been able to work around it. We’re it not, Nintendo would have been dead a long time ago.

realistic graphics have never been more than a marketing point. And never have they been a strong indicator of actual hood gameplay.

The success of cod is not the game itself, because frankly they aren’t that good, it’s that players and many of them love guns and there is no bigger licenser of guns and military equipment in games than CoD and people take huge joy in using something that they love already. CoD is a polished experience, but we’re it so great at what it does it wouldn’t need to remake 2 of its games already.

You seem to have missed the point like the regulators have: success in video games comes down to execution, not how graphically powerful you market as.

 

[Nesh]

No. You are trying to grasp at straws. Games have always been an art form, as we saw in the VGAs more games are and will be adopting anime or cell shaded graphics because it works for those games. These games stay timeless in look and still appeal to a wide range of audiences. Game developers know their technical budget and are have always been able to work around it. We’re it not, Nintendo would have been dead a long time ago.

realistic graphics have never been more than a marketing point. And never have they been a strong indicator of actual hood gameplay.

The success of cod is not the game itself, because frankly they aren’t that good, it’s that players and many of them love guns and there is no bigger licenser of guns and military equipment in games than CoD and people take huge joy in using something that they love already. CoD is a polished experience, but we’re it so great at what it does it wouldn’t need to remake 2 of its games already.

You seem to have missed the point like the regulators have: success in video games comes down to execution, not how graphically powerful you market as.

I have no idea how any of your points serve as counter arguments that the PS5 and XS consoles are performance upgrades that are bought for the improved experience enabled by that. High performance can contribute in a lot of ways in games. You know perfectly well that PS4 and XBOX One are less preferred now that they reached saturation, whereas Switch continues to sell as it focuses on a differentiated experience.

 

[Jay]

It's a long shot since neither were announced as multiplatform and and redfal wasn't even announced until after the purchase. release platforms change all the time. Just look at Gotham knights up until like 6 months before launch it was cross generational.

I also highly doubt that Zenimax even had a contract yet for either game with any of the console makers since it was still so far out. Even when star field got announced that was 2018 4 years before it was even going to be released and before the announcement of the ps5 and xbox series consoles. Also Ms said they would meet contract obligations so if there was a contract with sony to release starfield they would have done so.

Doesn't matter what consumers knew, or fact that games get dropped from platforms right up to release.

If FTC this time around asked MS was there PS versions in development, and answer was yes then MS took what would've been a multi plat game that was going to PS also and made it exclusive.
Which that single statement could easily be read as they wouldn't do.

I think they should've just left it as meeting current contractual obligations.
But then I think they should have no problems not releasing games wherever they want, regardless of the title including COD. As none would cause a competitor to close.

But this makes it seem like I'm defending the FTC and making me feel dirty.

 

[Jay]

in the history of consoles, I’ve never seen in the console land something called hi performance and low performance consoles.

Agree.
Guess valve should sue Nintendo to force them to put their games on the steam deck.
As Nintendo is obviously a monopoly now and stopping them from competing.
Both are hybrid consoles around same price point.
All the articles and sales breakdowns need to now separate them into high performance and switch categories
Switch, PS, Xbox are all consoles with differentiating exclusives.

 

[iroboto]

I have no idea how any of your points serve as counter arguments that the PS5 and XS consoles are performance upgrades that are bought for the improved experience enabled by that. High performance can contribute in a lot of ways in games. You know perfectly well that PS4 and XBOX One are less preferred now that they reached saturation, whereas Switch continues to sell as it focuses on a differentiated experience.

The point is declaring a single franchise as being the most critical franchise to a whole industry is complete hogwash; and to suggest Nintendo due to its low performance nature competes in a different market is alongside that hogwash. It’s a bad faith argument from the FTC.

If you want to block the merger just block it. But it’s clear they don’t understand the gaming industry when you declare a console low performance and therefore irrelevant. Games success all comes down to execution of a particular experience that players are looking for. Ultimately games are and often behave like a winner takes all market. The only thing cod wins at is Mil Sim. And Mil Sim alone does not dictate whether you will succeed or fail in the industry as per Nintendo’s success, as we can now see had surpassed ps4. COD represents a significant chunk of money for platform holders, but not enough to kill your platform if you lose it. And certainly others are more willing to enter the Mil Sim market if COD left it.