Former FTC Chair: "Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision has been followed by significant price hikes and layoffs, harming both gamers and developers"

"Rogue lobbyist"
🤭
Awkward John Krasinski GIF by Saturday Night Live
 
MS argued in court that prices wouldn't rice as a result of the merger. It was insane. The whole trial was pretty ridiculous. You guys had to be there :pie_pensive:
 
Last edited:
I have zero understanding of internal USA politics, but I can't blame Khan for firing a bit of venom in public.

Ever since it was revealed that the Judge's son is working for MS, it was a sealed deal regardless of how strong FTC case was. Plus as I understand FTC in general is mildly useful in those types of antitrust movements due to how the American law is structured, but I'm not an expert.
 
I have zero understanding of internal USA politics, but I can't blame Khan for firing a bit of venom in public.

Ever since it was revealed that the Judge's son is working for MS, it was a sealed deal regardless of how strong FTC case was. Plus as I understand FTC in general is mildly useful in those types of antitrust movements due to how the American law is structured, but I'm not an expert.
FTC was pretty terrible at making their arguments and I don't think they even asked for a different judge due to conflict of interest.

Overall, an average law student who is familiar with gaming could have put together a better argument vs a whole team of FTC lawyers.

The intent was good, the execution not so much.
 
Yeah. They are selling less consoles, and making more games multiplatform. Nothing about that says 'we are competing better against the competition than before'.

The problem with this deal is that it went above their head. They didn't have the installed base or growth to keep something like CoD exclusive. They tried exclusivity with Starfield and they figured they lost a ton of potential sales.

The plan kind of backfired because on top of Bethesda and ABK staying multiplatform, MS is also putting the likes of Forza and Gears on Playstation nowadays. Likely these acquisitions also caused the gaming division to be noticed by the board of directors. And Nutella obviously wants RoI.
 
Two minds of this.

Firstly, yeah the situation is terrible( layoffs, price increases, etc) as predicted. But the reason and how we got here is entirely different.

FTC's argument was that MS would be too dominant and simply use their infinite warchest to force out competitors.

But what has happened is that Xbox is on the verge of irrelevance.

FTC cannot, in good faith, argue that their arguments were valid. They did a poor job ofarguing their side and a lot of their arguments have proven to be false. Sure, outcome ended up being similar, but just because you end up in the same position doesn't mean your flawed argument wasn't flawed.
 
Lina Khan don't know what she is talking about and everything she said turned out to be wrong

She said the acquisition would kill fair competition but the opposite happened Sony is thriving while Xbox is on the verge of collapse

She said prices would go up and yeah everything in gaming hardware and software got more expensive Game Pass is thirty dollars which is high for many people but it makes sense for a company that wants to launch AAA games on a subscription service day one, in the end thirty a month for Game Pass is fairer than an eighty dollar Nintendo game but the reality is the service stopped growing and it's unlikely players will accept those prices

She talked about layoffs but just wait the next two years you'll see massive layoffs across all western gaming companies, Did anyone really think Bethesda on its own would be doing better? I don't think so

She talked about exclusives and what happened is Microsoft ended up porting almost everything

In the end PlayStation fans actually benefited from a few Xbox games and from having companies still afloat that could've gone bankrupt like Bethesda
 
Last edited:
It's not because they consolidated and now have a dominant position in the market. In fact the opposite.
Dominant or retarded position... the outcome was always going to be the same.

You dont spend almost $80B aquring publishers, cannibalize actual sales of your games and give them away in a sub service, all for a user base that cannot generate enough revenue to sustain all that.

That just makes no sense.

And even if that is your strategy, then you have to get your sub base for your service up to some ridiculous numbers. Now how consolidation is justified is that you believe you need to do that to provide enough content to draw in more subscribers. However, if that fails, you need to not only put that content on the platform that generates sales, but also increase the subscription cost.

But even if you did succeed, and you then become the dominant market platform, it would be at the direct expense of everyone else, which basically makes you a monopoly, and then guess what, prices will still go up cause now you answer to no one.

MS got itself in this position because they were stupid and did not actually understand the market they were in, or even their position in it. They never have, and everyone at MS who understood it (OG Xbox and 360 era) no longer works for them.
 
So everyone can rise the prices except Microsoft?
Microsoft is one of the largest companies on this planet and if we're going to allow anti-competitive practices like buying up large publishers, then we need some standards to make sure that people aren't worse off. The FTC's arguments were correct. We allowed MS to purchase a large publisher and got layoffs and price hikes.
 
Last edited:
Microsoft is the outlier here. No other company has been doing price hikes (following all the money printing) and layoffs (following the excessive hiring spree) after the lockdown years.
 
All you guys switching to digital and loving these subs are to blame.

"You will own nothing and be happy."

Whose happy? It was a pipe dream to believe that the continued erosion of ownership would be beneficial to anyone but those who control the rights of those products. How long before they charge a "maintenance fee" to manage your digital library?

I'm back to buying physical full time on console. I'm doing my part to fight back. Steam is digital because… no choice.

I never stopped buying physical and never will. You hit the nail on the head - it's the "erosion of ownership". There's other stuff too Digital was initially promoted as a way to get games cheaper. That never happened. Physical and digital are the same, with physical usually lower over time.

I see more people questioning ownership since this most recent Game Pass debacle started. It's good to see and I hope more people come to the conclusion you did.
 
All of a sudden, Florian Mueller is relevant again, what happened?

He and Hoeg were two of the biggest cheerleaders for the acquisition too (I still remember the ad nauseam Hoeg videos posted in the acquisition thread). You'd think they'd just lay low, but who knows what goes on behind the scenes if public opinion needs to be 'directed'.
 
Top Bottom