News FTC Seeks to Block Microsoft's Takeover of Activision

[Admin]

FTC alleges Microsoft will harm competition if it buys Activision, but Microsoft says otherwise.

FTC Seeks to Block Microsoft's Takeover of Activision : Read more

 

[bdcrlsn]

How does this "expand competition?"

 

[USAFRet]

How does this "expand competition?"

Thats just lawyerspeak for "protecting the people who pay me".

 

[pclaughton]

While I tend to agree with blocking this acquisition, a little consistency would be nice. Where were governments for Disney's spending spree or Amazon buying MGM?

 

[PiranhaTech]

How does this "expand competition?"

Apparently Microsoft agreed to bring games like CoD to the Switch. However, I do agree with the FTC quite a bit.

 

[thestryker]

This really just appears to be a result of the shifting currents of public opinion. Generally speaking these acquisitions do far more damage than good, but in this case actibliz is such a toxic company it would probably be a significant improvement for the employees. Hopefully the regulators get reasonable concessions and then let it go through.

 

[Heat_Fan89]

I have NO problem with this ruling and allowing Microsoft taking it to court. My one problem with the ruling is that SONY isn't blameless in all of this. They have used similar tactics from withholding third party games or content from the competition by making it exclusive. They all do it except SONY has decided to throw its toys out of the pram, crying foul.

SONY, is trying to keep their old business model in place which is, we build hardware and sell you games. Microsoft has decided to upset the apple cart by switching gears and saying, you don't need our hardware to play our games. Heck, if you want you can play them on a Samsung TV.

SONY has decided to hold on to the past while the industry is moving forward. When Gamestop unsettled game Publishers with their in your face bragging about used sales. Videogame Publishers cried foul because they weren't getting a cut on used sales, all the while Gamestop was making a killing. So the industry decided to fast forward the business model and deal directly with their customers via the console makers and digital delivery.

XBOX Game Pass is just an extension and a progression of this business model. SONY doesn't have anything as competitive as Game Pass even though they started their own similar service. So that's where the industry is heading and Microsoft sees that which is why it wants Activison so it can add to the Game Pass library. They have also indicated a willingness to offer long term contracts to third party games.

This really is NO different than Amazon upsetting the basket cart with storefront retail. Retail had to adjust. Best Buy nearly went out of business because of Amazon and now Best Buy is thriving because they invested into a dying business to compete with Amazon. Walmart is another company who has successfully taken on Amazon with their online business model and in several cases have outdone Amazon.

The bottom line is, there will always be changes to any business model. Companies who have defined and refined their business model do whatever it takes to protect their interest. SONY is in this category as they are trying to build a fort around how they have done business the past 25 years in the console space. They only reluctantly added their version of Game Pass which has not met expectations because of the success of Microsoft. They are trying to maintain what made them successful and just throwing a bone to their customers.

 

[bigdragon]

Good. The FTC should block this acquisition. All mergers of these gigantic holding companies should be blocked. There is entirely too much consolidation going on in the gaming industry. I can't stand ABK's executive leadership, but I'm not interested in seeing them get gone via this kind of merger.

 

[helper800]

In my opinion, I think mergers are better than say Tencent owning large portions of every studio and publisher on earth. One day Tencent is going to do something nobody likes but no company will have a right to refuse cause they will own 51%+ of every company.

 

[hotaru251]

In addition, Activision has some of the world’s most-played titles — including Call of Duty, World of Warcraft, Diablo, and Overwatch — in its stable, so should Microsoft decide to harm its rivals by blocking their access to these games, it will affect hundreds of millions of gamers worldwide.

I'd investigate bank accts as this entirely smells like Sony's prior statement and someone was bribed to do this.

My one problem with the ruling is that SONY isn't blameless in all of this. They have used similar tactics from withholding third party games or content from the competition by making it exclusive. They all do it except SONY has decided to throw its toys out of the pram, crying foul.

pretty much.

Bloodborne, Demon souls, original GoW games, timed exclusives like mhw & ff, etc,

Microsoft has decided to upset the apple cart by switching gears and saying, you don't need our hardware to play our games. Heck, if you want you can play them on a Samsung TV.

exactly.

also fact that MS lets you buy a game on console & w/o re-buying it you can play it on PC if u want too.

This is pro consumer mentality.

. So that's where the industry is heading and Microsoft sees that which is why it wants Activison so it can add to the Game Pass library. They have also indicated a willingness to offer long term contracts to third party games.

which is beneficial to them.

multiple outlets = larger audience = larger profit.

imagine how much $ Sony would make if they actually release bloodborne/demon souls onto PC...its THE reason you would ever get a console (console exclusives are legit anti consumer)
Sony's even said they no longer sell consoles at a loss so they arent subsidizing their cost via game purchases.


Also AVB has a god awful drama internally atm....how many lawsuits over past 3 yrs?

MS takes that serious and is the best option in industry to curb that and make sure doesnt happen again.

 

[spongiemaster]

also fact that MS lets you buy a game on console & w/o re-buying it you can play it on PC if u want too.

On a PC that's most likely running Microsoft Windows. MS still have ways of dragging money out of you that Sony wouldn't porting their exclusives to a PC.

 

[Sippincider]

The courts would rather have EA buy Activision?

While I have no love for Microsoft, at least they generally don't destroy everything they touch...

 

[cyrusfox]

, at least they generally don't destroy everything they touch

Rareware studios would like to have a chat about that... All that talent working on kinect games, ugh.
Don't forget Bungie as well... You could argue bungie wasn't destroyed but greatly diminished.

 

[USAFRet]

While I have no love for Microsoft, at least they generally don't destroy everything they touch...

Embrace, extend, and extinguish

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

 

[hotaru251]

On a PC that's most likely running Microsoft Windows.

but not a requirement.

where as sony: 'u bought this digital game in past? too bad buy it again as even though new console is backwards compatible we don't care"

you can hate on MS as a company, but from a consumer standpoint...they are THE best thing to happen in a long time. (between gamepass's value & the XB/PC pay once play on whatever you want)

Sony has the $ to make their own FPS and not rely on CoD...they choose not to. (tbh this is also not just a Sony thing..only one who actually does innovate new IP's & take risk anymore is Nintendo)

Them using BFas example was dumb becasue that was a dev's mistake that casued a failure (as BF has a large playerbase (but devs keep fricking up each new release and pissing on their playerbase who stick to older games)

 

[Heat_Fan89]

but not a requirement.

where as sony: 'u bought this digital game in past? too bad buy it again as even though new console is backwards compatible we don't care"

you can hate on MS as a company, but from a consumer standpoint...they are THE best thing to happen in a long time. (between gamepass's value & the XB/PC pay once play on whatever you want)

Sony has the $ to make their own FPS and not rely on CoD...they choose not to. (tbh this is also not just a Sony thing..only one who actually does innovate new IP's & take risk anymore is Nintendo)

Them using BFas example was dumb becasue that was a dev's mistake that casued a failure (as BF has a large playerbase (but devs keep fricking up each new release and pissing on their playerbase who stick to older games)

And the thing is that it is in Microsoft's best interest to leave COD on the Playstation. It is a money making machine for them. COD for Activision is like FUT for EA Sports FIFA. The return on investment for Microsoft will come quicker if COD finds its way on other platforms.

SONY, is still doing business like it's 2008. You buy a game for the PS2 and they release the same game of the PS3 and charge full price. Odds are if that game was real popular will find it's way on the following consoles.

The Last of Us first started out as a PS3 game and then was sold on the PS4, then again as a remaster for the PS4 and now it's being sold on the PS5 all for full price. They are planning to do the same with the Uncharted series, IIRC.

 

[helper800]

Embrace, extend, and extinguish

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend,_and_extinguish

As opposed to EA's strategy of, "Subdue, corrupt and annihilate." (sarcasm in case you were wondering)

 

[TheOtherOne]

As opposed to EA's strategy of, "Subdue, corrupt and annihilate." (sarcasm in case you were wondering)

Holy shoot! This brings back some memories. I've totally forgotten some of these were a thing back in the day and now six feet under partially or fully thanks to EA.