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.
This post did nothing but show me why Nintendo is in competition with MS and Sony.

The fact that anyone is trying to argue this absolutely comedic. Yall wouldn't have said none of this if the FTC didn't.
It's pretty clear especially when looking at the XSS that MS was targeting the same customers as the Switch. No way was that system designed for 'high performance' gamers. If that was true why did they make the XSX? For the higher high performance gaming segment? Will the madness ever cease? The FTC has opened an amazingly silly can of worms.
 
This makes zero sense. Microsoft almost let 343i release Halo: Infinite a year early. It was only the sound of the public laughing at them that made them reconsider. Sure they might have learned a lesson but for the most part they wrongly allow these studios to operate in a vacuum. It's about market control and not any kind of economies of scale that having a huge publishing house would bring.
Bethesda releasing a bad game under MS would be a PR disaster. Its not at the same level as Halo from 343i.
This is a buy out of a big studio.

As for bethesda, their engine is a disaster, and needs to be rolled soon. Its why their games are janky.
 
People were saying Nintendo doesn't sell in the same market area as Xbox and Playstation before this? Show me lol.

Nintendo put out documents that showed that their demographic is the same as Xbox and Playstation. The majority of people that own a Switch are in their 20s, as with Xbox and PS
Xbox was in third place before the FTC and CMA issued statements. Now MS is almost a monopoly dominating video games and must be stopped. The plot shift was swift.
 
In unrelated news,



Wonder if Mark wants to kill this deal

Probably doesn't want to spend millions on lawyers to pay $400 million for something most customers wouldn't buy anyway. Meta is in a worse place than they were in 2021 when they announced that acquisition so this is probably a much appreciated easy out.
 
Last edited:
It's pretty clear especially when looking at the XSS that MS was targeting the same customers as the Switch.

By not being a portable device and not having the same games

TGCnbeM.gif
 
It's pretty clear especially when looking at the XSS that MS was targeting the same customers as the Switch. No way was that system designed for 'high performance' gamers. If that was true why did they make the XSX? For the higher high performance gaming segment? Will the madness ever cease? The FTC has opened an amazingly silly can of worms.
My god, you are super dumb.

When did XSS had a portable device?

Steam deck is more of switch type console, than the xss could be.

Common Sense Monkey GIF by Travis
 
Xbox was in third place before the FTC and CMA issued statements. Now MS is almost a monopoly dominating video games and must be stopped. The plot shift was swift.
MS spent $67b.
That is the issue here. That is insane money to spend on a video game market. Not to mention buying the biggest 3rd party publisher in the gaming history.
 
MS spent $67b.
That is the issue here. That is insane money to spend on a video game market. Not to mention buying the biggest 3rd party publisher in the gaming history.
I just don't see it as a problem. Throwing big money around is what big businesses do. If MS was somehow preventing Nintendo or Sony from doing the same thing that would be an issue. There's literally no evidence to suggest that the acquisition is going to cause Sony or Nintendo to spiral into mediocrity or bankruptcy. There's no evidence to suggest that all of a sudden the xbox will come out on top. It's been clear for years that, globally, people have serious dislikes of the xbox brand, if even completely unfounded. That's not going to change if MS has activision. If anything, blocking the acquisition essentially shows favoritism to Sony. Nintendo isn't really a direct competitor to either MS or Sony. Sony is the company that is dominating, so preventing MS from acquiring activision is preventing competition. Heaven forbid sony doesnt sell quite as many playstations. The horror....
 
Happy Saturday Night Live GIF

https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/b...s/2210077-microsoftactivision-blizzard-matter

Microsoft/Activision Blizzard, In the Matter of

Tags:
Last Updated

December 16, 2022
Case Status

Pending
In the Matter of Microsoft Corporation, a corporation, and Activision Blizzard, Inc., a corporation
FTC Matter/File Number

2210077
Docket Number

9412
Enforcement Type

Part 3 Administrative Complaints






Incoming spicy news.
 
Bethesda releasing a bad game under MS would be a PR disaster. Its not at the same level as Halo from 343i.
This is a buy out of a big studio.

As for bethesda, their engine is a disaster, and needs to be rolled soon. Its why their games are janky.
This is the same MS that allowed Crackdown 3 to be released during a time when they were trying to build some momentum with the One X and Scarlett announcements. I know you understand how much a disaster it would be but I am not sure Xbox leadership understands that across the board.
 
This makes zero sense. Microsoft almost let 343i release Halo: Infinite a year early. It was only the sound of the public laughing at them that made them reconsider. Sure they might have learned a lesson but for the most part they wrongly allow these studios to operate in a vacuum. It's about market control and not any kind of economies of scale that having a huge publishing house would bring.
I believe that to be a case that is more intricate and has more nuance than that.

As a base, Halo Infinite was amazing. As a Halo experience, it was not up to par with previous Halo games or at least what we've come to expect from Halo. No Co-op, limited maps, etc. They made the wrong choice with the Slipspace engine. Hence the reason they are going to UE5 with the game. We might not see the fruits of that labor until 2024. That is a case of ROI, kicking it out of the door in a playable state. Nothing wrong with how the game plays, there just wasn't a lot of game to play at release but what was there worked fine. Two different things. We know that Starfield is done as far as being content and feature complete. Bethesda needs to make sure the game isn't broken in any shape or form. Again, two different things.
 
Last edited:
I just don't see it as a problem. Throwing big money around is what big businesses do. If MS was somehow preventing Nintendo or Sony from doing the same thing that would be an issue. There's literally no evidence to suggest that the acquisition is going to cause Sony or Nintendo to spiral into mediocrity or bankruptcy. There's no evidence to suggest that all of a sudden the xbox will come out on top. It's been clear for years that, globally, people have serious dislikes of the xbox brand, if even completely unfounded. That's not going to change if MS has activision. If anything, blocking the acquisition essentially shows favoritism to Sony. Nintendo isn't really a direct competitor to either MS or Sony. Sony is the company that is dominating, so preventing MS from acquiring activision is preventing competition. Heaven forbid sony doesnt sell quite as many playstations. The horror....
If MS is willing to spend that much money, then anything is possible.

Xbox position isnt a problem, but the company behind xbox is the problem. They are a trillion dollar company who are ready to spend that much money easily.
 
This is the same MS that allowed Crackdown 3 to be released during a time when they were trying to build some momentum with the One X and Scarlett announcements. I know you understand how much a disaster it would be but I am not sure Xbox leadership understands that across the board.
Bethesda is bigger than all xbox studios combined.
They spend $7.5b buying zenimax. They dont want that kind of disaster on their first ever game from their purchase.
 
I believe that to be a case that is more intricate and has more nuance than that.

As a base, Halo Infinite was amazing. As a Halo experience, it was not up to par with previous Halo games or at least what we've come to expect from Halo. No Co-op, limited maps, etc. They made the wrong choice with the Slipspace engine. Hence the reason they are going to UE5 with the game. We might not see the fruits of that labor until 2024. That is a case of ROI, kicking it out of the door in a playable state. Nothing wrong with how the game plays, there just wasn't a lot of game to play at release but what was there worked fine. Two different things. We know that Starfield is done as far as being content and feature complete. Bethesda needs to make sure the game isn't broken in any shape or form. Again, two different things.
I didn't love Infinite, but I would generally agree. Also, I thought the UE5 thing was just a rumor. Nobody substantiated it into anything real AFAIK.

I just don't know how you can kick out the actual jank of a Bethesda game without years of people showing the strange ways they break it. The game is just too open with a bunch of loosely coupled systems that interact in strange and often funny ways.
 
Bethesda is bigger than all xbox studios combined.
They spend $7.5b buying zenimax. They dont want that kind of disaster on their first ever game from their purchase.
As I said before we all get that it would be a disaster and most people would agree it would be stupid to allow this to happen. Still not sure how this knowledge suddenly makes Bethesda release a game without bugs and jank. I guess we'll see next year.
 
As I said before we all get that it would be a disaster and most people would agree it would be stupid to allow this to happen. Still not sure how this knowledge suddenly makes Bethesda release a game without bugs and jank. I guess we'll see next year.


They claim it's new/evolution of the older engines. It's also been cited for delays, and still probably not as good as UE5... But here's to hoping for less jank.
 
As I said before we all get that it would be a disaster and most people would agree it would be stupid to allow this to happen. Still not sure how this knowledge suddenly makes Bethesda release a game without bugs and jank. I guess we'll see next year.
If my guess is correct, Money.
Zenimax didnt have alot of budget, which explains rushed releases.
MS can afford those losses, and can delay the game.
 
New consumer group (10 people) lawsuit

heh these guys want the court to make Microsoft and Activision pay their legal bills for bringing this lawsuit against them plus pay them damages
 
As I said before we all get that it would be a disaster and most people would agree it would be stupid to allow this to happen. Still not sure how this knowledge suddenly makes Bethesda release a game without bugs and jank. I guess we'll see next year.

There are a lot of metrics that we don't consider on core gaming forums. Metrics that are absolutely essential and at the forefront to console makers business models. Not having a game that can push sales and build mindshare has a minute by minute cost. Demographics, momentum, and a year long stream of potential customers being divided up by your rivals. A great number of console owners only own one system and once they're on that eco-system it's extremely difficult to tempt them away.

I say all that to say this... As soon as Bethesda has a workable version of their game it'll be released. Bugs and all. They need to stem the flow of lost consumers that are singing up elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
If my guess is correct, Money.
Zenimax didnt have alot of budget, which explains rushed releases.
MS can afford those losses, and can delay the game.
100%

If MS hadn't bought Bethesda, Starfield would have come out on 11/11/2022 as first planned and people would be playing it bugs and all.
Now MS own them, getting money ASAP isn't as much of a priority, hence the delay.

Same will apply for COD - making a new COD every year won't be as much of a priority, that allows a lot of the ABK devs to work on other things. Output from ABK gonna get a lot more varied after the takeover goes through
 
IF it's not too much to ask. and IF it's possible. can we put this thread into a sticky thread? every time I visit the form I see it on the first page anyway and I keep reading the head title thinking it's a new thread lol.
 
There are a lot of metrics that we don't consider on core gaming forums, but are absolutely essential and at the forefront to console makers. Not having a game that can push sales has a minute by minute cost. Demographics, momentum, and a year long stream of potential customers being divided up by your rivals. A great number of console owners only own one system and once they're on that eco-system it's extremely difficult to tempt them away.

I say all that to say this... As soon as Bethesda has a workable version of their game it'll be released. Bugs and all. They need to stem the flow of lost consumers that are singing up elsewhere.
That could be the case too. But with gamepass, don't think MS needs that, especially with steam.
However Starfield is next gen, and xseries needs to have a sizeable userbase. That another way to look at it.
 
That could be the case too. But with gamepass, don't think MS needs that, especially with steam.
However Starfield is next gen, and xseries needs to have a sizeable userbase. That another way to look at it.

Microsoft Execs have gone on record stating that GP will only ever bring in 15% of XBOX revenue.

So with those statements in mind, it's impossible to refer to GP as some type of magic pill that can fix Microsoft's gaming woes.
 
By not being a portable device and not having the same games

TGCnbeM.gif
Portable is just a arbitrary distinction. Again VR isn't on the Xbox at all. I guess Sony is now a console VR monopoly right? All the platforms have unique characteristics. Xbox is the only company targeting both low and high end customers with their hardware offerings. Oops another monopoly just popped up! You know what they all have in common? They are all video games consoles competing for the same money and time. The carving up of the market is nonsense.
 
IF it's not too much to ask. and IF it's possible. can we put this thread into a sticky thread? every time I visit the form I see it on the first page anyway and I keep reading the head title thinking it's a new thread lol.

Ain't nothing new happening in here, just the same old shit, so that should help temper expectations when you think it's new.
 
Microsoft Execs have gone on record stating that GP will only ever bring in 15% of XBOX revenue.

So with those statements in mind, it's impossible to refer to GP as some type of magic pill that can fix Microsoft's gaming woes.
That is 25m userbase.
Plus 15% of Xbox is a lot at that number.
https://dotesports.com/business/news/xboxs-2021-revenue-set-record-high-exceeded-16-billion
that is how much they generated in 2021.
that is $2.4b if gamepass generates 15% of Xbox.
with higher userbase, it could generate more than that.
we are not even counting steam sales or normal Xbox sales.
 
Portable is just a arbitrary distinction. Again VR isn't on the Xbox at all. I guess Sony is now a console VR monopoly right? All the platforms have unique characteristics. Xbox is the only company targeting both low and high end customers with their hardware offerings. Oops another monopoly just popped up! You know what they all have in common? They are all video games consoles competing for the same money and time. The carving up of the market is nonsense.

One of the main selling points of the switch is arbitrary now :messenger_tears_of_joy:

You're fucking mad bro
 
Last edited:
Nobody bought anything on the Wii U.

Switch is 100M+, it would definitely sell.

Did you see the list of Switch's top selling games? No 3rd party publisher is making significant money with the Switch.
It's been a huge problem for Nintendo ever since they left the high-performing console market after the gamecube. Publishers tried really hard with the Wii due to its numbers, with Ubisoft even pumping up the Rabbids IP to cater for family-friendly games, but they still failed nonetheless.



No one ceases to buy a Series X with Halo and CoD because they already own a Switch. They're serving different markets.
 
One of the main selling points of the switch is arbitrary now :messenger_tears_of_joy:

You're fucking mad bro
When was the last time you saw MS pushing 'highest performance console' in any of their advertising? I've only see XSS ads and that console is targeting the same casual friendly audience as the Switch. The audience for Switch far exceeds the portable market, just like Xbox audience is bigger than the high performance market, and the audience for PlayStation exceeds the VR market. It is a silly way to segment the market for political purposes.
 
When was the last time you saw MS pushing 'highest performance console' in any of their advertising? I've only see XSS ads and that console is targeting the same casual friendly audience as the Switch. The audience for Switch far exceeds the portable market, just like Xbox audience is bigger than the high performance market, and the audience for PlayStation exceeds the VR market. It is a silly way to segment the market for political purposes.

You keep telling yourself these things mr portable gaming is arbitrary :messenger_tears_of_joy::messenger_ok:
 
It's pretty clear especially when looking at the XSS that MS was targeting the same customers as the Switch. No way was that system designed for 'high performance' gamers. If that was true why did they make the XSX? For the higher high performance gaming segment? Will the madness ever cease? The FTC has opened an amazingly silly can of worms.
Series S is a Gamepass machine. Thats its purpose. To undercut the market with its price and push Gamepass. Nothing to do with the Switch. It isn't a portable machine like the Switch and it doesn't do physical games like the Switch.
Xbox was in third place before the FTC and CMA issued statements. Now MS is almost a monopoly dominating video games and must be stopped. The plot shift was swift.
Absolute comedy
 
100%

If MS hadn't bought Bethesda, Starfield would have come out on 11/11/2022 as first planned and people would be playing it bugs and all.
Now MS own them, getting money ASAP isn't as much of a priority, hence the delay.

Same will apply for COD - making a new COD every year won't be as much of a priority, that allows a lot of the ABK devs to work on other things. Output from ABK gonna get a lot more varied after the takeover goes through
You're living in an absolute dreamland 😂
 
Series S is a Gamepass machine. Thats its purpose. To undercut the market with its price and push Gamepass. Nothing to do with the Switch. It isn't a portable machine like the Switch and it doesn't do physical games like the Switch.

Absolute comedy
Even your homeboy is stabbing you in the back DarkMage619 DarkMage619
Hawaii Thats Cold GIF by ION
 
Last edited:
So should we lump Nintendo Switch into mobile gaming?
According to the FTC, Nintendo is a monopoly, and they should be broken up. It also means that Microsoft and Sony could in theory acquire Nintendo because they aren't competitors and is considered a vertical merger and not a horizontal merger.
 
According to the FTC, Nintendo is a monopoly, and they should be broken up. It also means that Microsoft and Sony could in theory acquire Nintendo because they aren't competitors and is considered a vertical merger and not a horizontal merger.

This is too funny. I love it. Good catch.


Also, SonyGAF what did you do?

The private lawsuit was filed on behalf of 10 video game players in California, New Mexico and New Jersey.

Similar to the FTC case, the gamers are seeking a court order prohibiting the companies from consummating the merger, nullify the break-up fee and pay their legal costs.

The gamers' suit alleges that the merger would violate the Clayton Antitrust Act by reducing competition in the gaming sector and by extension harming the public.

Their complaint cites concerns that the union would give Microsoft power over multiple levels of the gaming industry "to foreclose rivals, limit output, reduce consumer choice, raise prices, and further inhibit competition."

Source
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom