Working regards generating PR, not in influencing the market in any way.
Microsoft acquired Activision Blizzard King for $69 Billion on 2023-10-13
- Thread starter Rangers
- Start date
davis.anthony
Veteran
And then 11 months after X360 released PC got a little GPU called the 8800GTX that flat out wrecked Xenos in X360.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Possibly a side effect of having an American HQ, where the culture is that truth is is whoever shouts the loudest, or has the most lobbying money.
Not only that but just extremally one sided and ignoring other facts. We have heard diffrent opinions form lawyers about this deal, some said it will pass without any objections other said its gonna get blocket. This only shows how complicated issue is, there was objections from companies but there also was comment that deal will not have any impact on market. Who is right who is wrong.
UNI calls on EU to consider impacts on workers of the Microsoft-Activision merger - UNI Global Union
Beside COD obsessed people there are also 20 millions workers that want this deal to happen and they say this:
“We know that the commission is focusing on the effect the deal will have on consumers, but it cannot ignore the role this deal would have in making the video game labour market fairer for workers,” said Christy Hoffman, General Secretary of UNI Global Union. “This is an industry where workers are crushed by excessive hours and low pay while facing sexual harassment and discrimination. It is an industry that needs an expansion of worker protections, and Microsoft’s commitment to labour rights will help make that happen.”
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Neither the EU or UK regulators are able to factor this into their decisions, this is outside their assessment criteria. Back on page 1, post 14 I said this acquisition would be good for Activison-Blizzard employees so I get where UNI is coming from, but it's rhetoric by folks who don't understand how these processes work. There is no mandate to approve a merger because one party is a shitty employer.
Hopefully there will be a decent readout of today's proceedings by tomorrow at the latest.
I've read the statements by the regulatory bodies and there are obvious concerns in other areas, but the only public statements I've read from Sony have been about COD. I do find it funny that COD is a franchise that nobody I know publicly "cares about" but everyone buys. Which perfectly sums up Microsoft's position. "COD isn't very important. We want to own it".
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Because only Sony has made their concerns public. Everybody else is putting their concerns forward in private. That is generally how these things play out.
The UK CMA suggestion to Microsoft was broadly that the UK would approve the deal if Call of Duty was spun out of the deal. Microsoft have yet to accept that, which does call into question their position on Call of Duty not being very important. If it's not important, and the only think standing in the way of UK approval, why wouldn't Microsoft leap at this?
For what it's worth, I also don't get the Call of Duty hysteria either. I'm clearly not the target market, which may be angry, racist homophobic teens.
And unionize is not a problem in EU. American worker problem is not the responsability of EU.
Paintball, military, action hero fantasy with some skill sprinkled in. I wouldn’t say angry homophobic teens. It’s got broad appeal for most people who enjoy action movies where there is swat or guns.Because only Sony has made their concerns public. Everybody else is putting their concerns forward in private. That is generally how these things play out.
The UK CMA suggestion to Microsoft was broadly that the UK would approve the deal if Call of Duty was spun out of the deal. Microsoft have yet to accept that, which does call into question their position on Call of Duty not being very important. If it's not important, and the only think standing in the way of UK approval, why wouldn't Microsoft leap at this?
For what it's worth, I also don't get the Call of Duty hysteria either. I'm clearly not the target market, which may be angry, racist homophobic teens.
It’s just a little boring on the skill side since the levelling system makes the game unfair, but it’s an addictive piece for people to collect shit, so it stays in the game. I consider this bad design, but what do I know.
The problem is not CoD, it is Microsoft trying to create a vertical monopol.For what it's worth, I also don't get the Call of Duty hysteria either. I'm clearly not the target market, which may be angry, racist homophobic teens.
It just means that MS wants the deal to go through. Sony is the primary reason this deal won’t go through. Thus negotiations, MS to move it through, Sony to benefit from this merger.
If Sony could really just hold out and watch this deal get blocked, I don’t think they would be dealing with MS. But no reason not to window browse what MS would offer.
That's sort of my point. People here keep talking about competitors concerns not being about COD, and that it's just a narrative perpetuated by Microsoft. But the only party we 100% know is opposed to the deal has made public statements 100% about COD. There are concerns laid out in the documents we have access to with the parties names redacted, but most of them can be seen tangentially about COD, and then cloud gaming. But even that would be about a foreclosure for content, so COD is still a factor.
In that they produce the hardware and the content for that hardware in a closed ecosystem? That's been the video game market since 1985, excluding outliers like 3DO. Also, the modern cell phone/tablet market. Also razor blades/handles. Also electric toothbrushes.
If we exclude hardware, and simply look at storefronts/subscription services where a significant percentage of content is produced my the operator, we have Netflix, Apple, HBO, Paramount... Basically everyone in the TV and movie space. If we look at physical media, remember that Disney, Warner Bros, Sony and Universal are all on the board of the Blu-ray Disc Association. They are the group that collects royalties from the manufacture of BR discs and hardware. Does that mean a portion of every Xbox One/Series physical disc sales (and a fee from anyone who downloads the BR player from the Xbox store) ends up going to Sony?
Live: Microsoft's Activision Blizzard press conference in Brussels
Microsoft is talking after today's European Commission hearing
www.gamesindustry.biz
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Sony is concerned about one game on one platform. It's clearly not the main reason for scrutiny as both the EU and UK regulators have provided a list of four markets in which competitors have expressed concerns. Please stop listening only to Microsoft's PR statements. If you wish to enlighten yourself, read what the regulators have actually said.
AB is producing content for Sony, too. Call of Duty and Blizzard are huge names and these games and their software are selling in millions.
Similar threads
