Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)

Do you believe the deal will be approved?


  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Cool and all, but that is one guy out of hundreds working on the game.

Have you been following the thread? I'll quote myself as a reply here -

Now take my post about ID@Xbox. To current date they directly funded and supported 4,600 developers globally in 94 countries.

ActiBliz total employees tops out at about 9,500 staff. ID@Xbox alone has already supported and grown the market by 50% of the Activision buyout in the previous 10 years under MS/Xbox.

One guy my ass, if you're going to make claims back them up. Chris is also a major contributor to games like Diablo, WoW, Overwatch etc (he's not just a first year dev). I also wonder how Xbox and programs like Gamepass and ID@Xbox grow or shrink over the next 10 years. I have a good idea where that's heading; further reduction or overtaking of that percentage past 50%.
 
Last edited:
Haven't been checking in with this thread the past few days. Someone tell me how I should feel about this merger, specifically those on the pro side of the argument.
 
Not so sure I feel that way. Game Pass growing is relevant to my interests, and I don't suspect the doomer "this is bad for the industry" take.
giphy.gif
 
Haven't been checking in with this thread the past few days. Someone tell me how I should feel about this merger, specifically those on the pro side of the argument.
MS should provide an official response to the FTC suit within the next week or so otherwise it will be a default no judgment. That will be the best chance to see how MS plans on responding going forward.
 
Have you been following the thread? I'll quote myself as a reply here -



One guy my ass, if you're going to make claims back them up. Chris is also a major contributor to games like Diablo, WoW, Overwatch etc (he's not just a first year dev). I also wonder how Xbox and programs like Gamepass and ID@Xbox grow or shrink over the next 10 years. I have a good idea where that's heading; further reduction or overtaking of that percentage past 50%.
You forum warriors like routine put too much responsibility on individuals in game development. Sure there are some superstars out there with great vision, excellent design or solid management. However those arent usually the names you hear of.

But i guess you know about game development by posting on a forum instead of making games?
 
Lmao 🤣 why would you post something so dishonest clearly not all of Microsoft vs Sony wow do you want to get Microsoft's movie revenue and compare it to Sony's ? Like what type of stupidity twilight have we reached in this thread.
Ask Ms who spent $67b cash.
That money come from their business side.
 
This is from Era. As far as I know, you guys hate them.

Of the studios Microsoft has bought in recent years:
  • Compulsion Games: no announcements or releases yet under Microsoft
  • Double Fine: released Psychonauts 2 as a multiplatform game (was announced as multiplatform before the acquisition), no other games have been announced
  • inXile Entertainment: released Wasteland 3 as a multiplatform game (was announced as multiplatform before the acquisition) and Frostpoint VR, an Oculus game. No other games have been announced
  • Mojang: released Minecraft on various platforms including multiple Nintendo systems. Also released Minecraft Dungeons as a multiplatform title and has Minecraft Legends coming up, which will also be multiplatform
  • Ninja Theory: released Bleeding Edge as a PC and Xbox One exclusive and has Hellblade 2 coming as a PC and Xbox Series X/S exclusive
  • Obsidian Entertainment: released The Outer Worlds as a multiplatform game (was announced as multiplatform before the acquisition), Grounded as a XB1/XSX/PC exclusive, Pentiment as a XB1/XSX/PC exclusive and has announced The Outer Worlds 2 and Avowed as XSX/PC exclusives
  • Playground Games & Undead Labs: grouping these 2 together since they were exclusive before the acquisition anyway, so there's no change here in what platforms they develop for
  • Arkane Studios: released Deathloop as a multiplatform game after being a PS5 timed console exclusive due to contractual obligations. Have also announced Redfall as a XSX/PC exclusive
  • Bethesda Game Studios: announced Starfield as a XSX/PC exclusive. Also working on The Elder Scrolls 6 with no announced platforms
  • id Software: released next-gen versions including a PS5 version of Doom Eternal. There were also PS4, XB1, Switch, PS5 and XSX version of the original Quake, these weren't developed by id Software but I'm listing those here since they were the original developer and Bethesda published those new versions after the acquisition
  • MachineGames: working on an Indiana Jones game, and as of 2018 were working on Wolfenstein 3. Platforms for both games unannounced
  • Released Ghostwire Tokyo as a PS5 timed console exclusive due to contractual obligations, likely coming to Xbox Series X/S in early 2023
  • ZeniMax Online Studios: have not released or announced any new projects, but have continued support for all versions of Elder Scrolls Online and Fallout 76 including PlayStation versions
 
This is from Era. As far as I know, you guys hate them.

Of the studios Microsoft has bought in recent years:
  • Compulsion Games: no announcements or releases yet under Microsoft
  • Double Fine: released Psychonauts 2 as a multiplatform game (was announced as multiplatform before the acquisition), no other games have been announced
  • inXile Entertainment: released Wasteland 3 as a multiplatform game (was announced as multiplatform before the acquisition) and Frostpoint VR, an Oculus game. No other games have been announced
  • Mojang: released Minecraft on various platforms including multiple Nintendo systems. Also released Minecraft Dungeons as a multiplatform title and has Minecraft Legends coming up, which will also be multiplatform
  • Ninja Theory: released Bleeding Edge as a PC and Xbox One exclusive and has Hellblade 2 coming as a PC and Xbox Series X/S exclusive
  • Obsidian Entertainment: released The Outer Worlds as a multiplatform game (was announced as multiplatform before the acquisition), Grounded as a XB1/XSX/PC exclusive, Pentiment as a XB1/XSX/PC exclusive and has announced The Outer Worlds 2 and Avowed as XSX/PC exclusives
  • Playground Games & Undead Labs: grouping these 2 together since they were exclusive before the acquisition anyway, so there's no change here in what platforms they develop for
  • Arkane Studios: released Deathloop as a multiplatform game after being a PS5 timed console exclusive due to contractual obligations. Have also announced Redfall as a XSX/PC exclusive
  • Bethesda Game Studios: announced Starfield as a XSX/PC exclusive. Also working on The Elder Scrolls 6 with no announced platforms
  • id Software: released next-gen versions including a PS5 version of Doom Eternal. There were also PS4, XB1, Switch, PS5 and XSX version of the original Quake, these weren't developed by id Software but I'm listing those here since they were the original developer and Bethesda published those new versions after the acquisition
  • MachineGames: working on an Indiana Jones game, and as of 2018 were working on Wolfenstein 3. Platforms for both games unannounced
  • Released Ghostwire Tokyo as a PS5 timed console exclusive due to contractual obligations, likely coming to Xbox Series X/S in early 2023
  • ZeniMax Online Studios: have not released or announced any new projects, but have continued support for all versions of Elder Scrolls Online and Fallout 76 including PlayStation versions
And what is the point of this?
 
You forum warriors like routine put too much responsibility on individuals in game development. Sure there are some superstars out there with great vision, excellent design or solid management. However those arent usually the names you hear of.

But i guess you know about game development by posting on a forum instead of making games?

What is it you're on about exactly? Fuck me. I gave you hard data about 4,600 developers, not counting ActiBliz at all, that Xbox has funded and released games with away from first party, and you don't review your position but double down with an attack? Ok.

EDIT: Also, I'll take 5 Carmacks in-house vs 250 developers out of college/uni on contracts.

EDIT2: I dev and sell web/business solutions and use many of the same tools as the game industry and have to manage similar contractors/partners/staff/projects/IP e.g designers, coders, UX, payments, database, sales, finance, target platforms/devices .... blah blah. I too face Azure/MS, AWS, shopify, wordpress, wix etc etc. It doesn't stop competition in the marketplace when there are 2-5 major players. Funny how that correlates to the gaming industry and this case specifically. I have also been able to code games since I was 8 years old, back in the 80s. Further I have spent years learning tools like 3DMAX or photoshop or Visual Studio etc as a hobby or in my company services, albeit badly on the art front for me, but I have enough knowledge to be dangerous to myself and others in these threads.
 
Last edited:
You forum warriors like routine put too much responsibility on individuals in game development. Sure there are some superstars out there with great vision, excellent design or solid management. However those arent usually the names you hear of.

But i guess you know about game development by posting on a forum instead of making games?
Are you saying guys like that isnt more valuable?
Dude, look at tod howard and Kojima. These 2 can make big games with less than 100 devs alone.

A man like that has a big talent.
 
We need way more blocking of outright purchase deals / mergers at high levels like this.

Everyone let Disney buy up the whole world of licensing while also owning major news / media empires and now most of the entertainment in the US is utterly braindead drivel written by corporate committees.

Generally speaking, don't ever allow a corporation to buy out a sector of the market. And if they grow into different empires in different competitive domains just living under one roof, force the company to be split into separate entities for each domain.
 
We need way more blocking of outright purchase deals / mergers at high levels like this.

Everyone let Disney buy up the whole world of licensing while also owning major news / media empires and now most of the entertainment in the US is utterly braindead drivel written by corporate committees.

Generally speaking, don't ever allow a corporation to buy out a sector of the market. And if they grow into different empires in different competitive domains just living under one roof, force the company to be split into separate entities for each domain.
As long as lobbying exist, these corpo would do bog buyout.
The country needs to unit and abolish lobbying.
 
You are a accusing him of lying, you prove your claim. Also again you are mistaken; it's dumb to not include Nintendo in the market and debate that it isn't a competitor.
Nintendo isn't affected by the acquisition and focuses on a different type of games. Sony and MS fight for the same market, are direct competitors and Activision is their top publisher with a small market share of their markets, while in Nintendo consoles the Nintendo published games are basically over half of the game sales of their platform.

It makes sense to ignore Nintendo when talking about the acquisition and its effects.

Public statements vs internal tracking and metrics that aren't meant to be shared.

One is valuable, one could be printed on toilet roll.
Regulators get the internal tracking from the companies and also external tracking from NPD etc. All say MS is third in consoles.

This FTC needs to provide a solid argument on why Nintendo isn't a competitor. If they can't, that means that Nintendo is a competitor and their whole augment falls apart, because the judge will ask why Nintendo can thrive without COD.
No, even MS themselves explained to regulators why Nintendo isn't a direct competitor and why aren't affected by this acquisition. FTC doesn't have to prove something that both sides agree.
 
Last edited:
We need way more blocking of outright purchase deals / mergers at high levels like this.

Everyone let Disney buy up the whole world of licensing while also owning major news / media empires and now most of the entertainment in the US is utterly braindead drivel written by corporate committees.

Generally speaking, don't ever allow a corporation to buy out a sector of the market. And if they grow into different empires in different competitive domains just living under one roof, force the company to be split into separate entities for each domain.
Ya, but does Activision qualify as a whole sector of a market?
 
Nintendo isn't affected by the acquisition and focuses on a different type of games. Sony and MS fight for the same market, are direct competitors and Activision is their top publisher with a small market share of their markets, while in Nintendo consoles the Nintendo published games are basically over half of the game sales of their platform.

It makes sense to ignore Nintendo when talking about the acquisition and its effects.
You might not have heard but MS promised CoD and had Minecraft ported to the Switch and Nintendo platforms. That looks like Nintendo absolutely will be affected by this acquisition because those games would not have come without MS.

Sony is the only console with VR. Does that mean it is not competing with Nintendo and MS for gamers money and time because of that difference? I wouldn't wouldn't want to make that case in court.
Regulators get the internal tracking from the companies and also external tracking from NPD etc. All say MS is third in consoles.
How can MS be both third in console yet only have one competitor? Why would the NPD track Nintendo console and game sales if it is not a competitor in the video game market?
No, even MS themselves explained to regulators why Nintendo isn't a direct competitor and why aren't affected by this acquisition. FTC doesn't have to prove something that both sides agree.
MS claimed they were third in consoles not that they were only in competition with Sony. Nintendo proves a platform holder can compete no matter what other platforms are doing. You can't arbitrarily ignore them because it's inconvenient to a monopoly argument levied at MS.
 
Last edited:
I'm sorry to report that WordPerfect wasn't killed by Microsoft Office. It isn't dead and never was. It's still out there being sold by Corel. Their last major release was in 2021. It's still used by lots of people who still prefer it because it doesn't work just like Microsoft office.
I know Wordperfect is still sold but it's a niche product now.
It provides more fine grained control over document formatting than Microsoft Word and has features that make it a preferred option for legal document formatting and epub authors.
What next, you'll be telling me LaTeX is for academics. Nobody cares. The point was that somebody said they didn't initially bundle it with windows and they did. Do you want to argue that fact? If not, what's the point of your post?
But by all means continue to present your opinions as fact in the most hyperbolic way possible. It is quite entertaining.
It's ok if you think it's hyperbolic but they took them to court:

https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/novell-sues-microsoft-for-sinking-wordperfect/

https://www.reuters.com/article/microsoft-novell-idCNN0314893820110504

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ns-antitrust-case-as-top-court-rejects-novell
 
Last edited:
100% they will. Anyone who believes otherwise is seriously delusional or is named

"Damn I want to play some multi player in Call of Duty"
"We don't have that"
"Oh, that's sucks. What other online games do you have?"
"Shut up and play God of War"
This is from Era. As far as I know, you guys hate them.

Of the studios Microsoft has bought in recent years:
  • Compulsion Games: no announcements or releases yet under Microsoft
  • Double Fine: released Psychonauts 2 as a multiplatform game (was announced as multiplatform before the acquisition), no other games have been announced
  • inXile Entertainment: released Wasteland 3 as a multiplatform game (was announced as multiplatform before the acquisition) and Frostpoint VR, an Oculus game. No other games have been announced
  • Mojang: released Minecraft on various platforms including multiple Nintendo systems. Also released Minecraft Dungeons as a multiplatform title and has Minecraft Legends coming up, which will also be multiplatform
  • Ninja Theory: released Bleeding Edge as a PC and Xbox One exclusive and has Hellblade 2 coming as a PC and Xbox Series X/S exclusive
  • Obsidian Entertainment: released The Outer Worlds as a multiplatform game (was announced as multiplatform before the acquisition), Grounded as a XB1/XSX/PC exclusive, Pentiment as a XB1/XSX/PC exclusive and has announced The Outer Worlds 2 and Avowed as XSX/PC exclusives
  • Playground Games & Undead Labs: grouping these 2 together since they were exclusive before the acquisition anyway, so there's no change here in what platforms they develop for
  • Arkane Studios: released Deathloop as a multiplatform game after being a PS5 timed console exclusive due to contractual obligations. Have also announced Redfall as a XSX/PC exclusive
  • Bethesda Game Studios: announced Starfield as a XSX/PC exclusive. Also working on The Elder Scrolls 6 with no announced platforms
  • id Software: released next-gen versions including a PS5 version of Doom Eternal. There were also PS4, XB1, Switch, PS5 and XSX version of the original Quake, these weren't developed by id Software but I'm listing those here since they were the original developer and Bethesda published those new versions after the acquisition
  • MachineGames: working on an Indiana Jones game, and as of 2018 were working on Wolfenstein 3. Platforms for both games unannounced
  • Released Ghostwire Tokyo as a PS5 timed console exclusive due to contractual obligations, likely coming to Xbox Series X/S in early 2023
  • ZeniMax Online Studios: have not released or announced any new projects, but have continued support for all versions of Elder Scrolls Online and Fallout 76 including PlayStation versions
So, we are back to Microsoft having no games.
Makes the acquisition all that easier.
 
It was a leadership failure which led to that point, not MS. If you read the documents which I provided you, it will tell you that.
What you sent was an opinion piece by a site at the time that they decided to sue, not really documents. They ultimately failed a decade later but their complaints were that they had no knowledge of being able to develop for windows and when they did they didn't have the same access to the windows API to make a performant word processor on it.

Frankly I'm not saying MS broke any antitrust laws or did anything they weren't allowed to do. Only that they were bundling it with windows when competing with WordPerfect then when competition wasn't really there anymore later versions of word weren't free and cost a lot of money.
 
Last edited:
I know Wordperfect is still sold but it's a niche product now.

What next, you'll be telling me LaTeX is for academics. Nobody cares. The point was that somebody said they didn't initially bundle it with windows and they did. Do you want to argue that fact? If not, what's the point of your post?

It's ok if you think it's hyperbolic but they took them to court:

https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/novell-sues-microsoft-for-sinking-wordperfect/

https://www.reuters.com/article/microsoft-novell-idCNN0314893820110504

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ns-antitrust-case-as-top-court-rejects-novell
Yeah, from a standard developer point of view the opaque nature of Windows' proprietary APIs to developers - even when getting early access - compared to their own in-house development for Office is definitely not fair regardless of what US judges say about that old case.

Th switch of APIs at the 11th hour from the beta developer API Novell had been supplied by Microsoft - while Microsoft developed using the real API - then leaving Novell with no way of catching up to compete with Word on time was devastating to their chances of competing long-term.

In the UK and EU the complaint would have been a different story IMO where it seems the essence of "fairness" is considered stronger than an legalese proof of fairness, and as would have Google's defence against Oracle - after Oracle acquired Java with Sun Micro Systems - suing over use of fair use of a open source language (Java) the world software community grew and built believing it couldn't be weaponised.

As for source material of what went down with Word Perfect, here's a very good link from a website that used to publish from lawyers/etc going to the actual hearings and reporting on it using court transcripts, etc. This is the link for the Novell vs Microsoft case.

http://groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20130506174153380
 
What you sent was an opinion piece by a site at the time that they decided to sue, not really documents. They ultimately failed a decade later but their complaints were that they had no knowledge of being able to develop for windows and when they did they didn't have the same access to the windows API to make a performant word processor on it.

Frankly I'm not saying MS broke any antitrust laws or did anything they weren't allowed to do. Only that they were bundling it with windows when competing with WordPerfect then when competition wasn't really there anymore later versions of word weren't free and cost a lot of money.
This is from antitrust report.

The ruling deconstructs Novell's claim that Microsoft's withdrawal of support for namespace extension APIs prevented WordPerfect, Quattro Pro, and Perfect Office from being released until May 1996 (three months after Novell sold WordPerfect to Corel). But monopolists, such as Microsoft, aren't required to cooperate with competitors, Motz wrote. Moreover, Novell didn't complain to Microsoft about the lack of API support at the time, and decided to write its own customized file open dialog rather than using the common file open dialog Microsoft provided instead of APIs. Internally, Novell didn't even hold any high-level meetings about the problem. The task of writing proper code for Windows 95 was given to a middle manager, who delegated responsibility to two developers.
Even though the case centered around office software, Novell argued that Microsoft's actions prevented Novell from developing successful middleware that might have challenged the Windows monopoly over the operating system market.

But WordPerfect's market share (about 15 percent of the Windows-compatible word processing market prior to the release of Windows 95) was already low enough that even a successful launch isn't likely to have saved it, the judge wrote.

"In short, no reasonable jury could find, on the basis of the evidence presented at trial, that Microsoft's withdrawal of support for the namespace extension APIs caused Novell's failure to develop its applications within 90 days of the release of Windows 95," Motz wrote.
https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...-microsoft-didnt-kill-wordperfect-novell-did/

MS bundle wasnt the reason. Novel messed up badly.
 
Last edited:
Lmao 🤣 why would you post something so dishonest clearly not all of Microsoft vs Sony wow do you want to get Microsoft's movie revenue and compare it to Sony's ? Like what type of stupidity twilight have we reached in this thread.

You gotta take it easy with feynoob feynoob he's here mostly to promote resetera members by copy pasting their posts :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom