Microsoft's deal to buy Activison/Blizzard for $67 billion, dead?

[jfreund]

Meanwhile, media megamergers such as Disney/Fox and Warner/Discovery sail through. All "mainstream media" and major streaming services are owned by barely a handful of corporations, but when it comes to video games these regulatory agencies have to draw the line!

I hate all corporations on every side of the ActiBlizz/MS deal, but Sony's lobbyists whining loudest and paying the most does not mean Sony should get their way. I don't particularly care if MS gets to buy ActiBlizz, I just want to see Sony get kicked in the balls.

 

[Flogger23m]

“Less innovation for gamers”

They have a point. If Microsoft buys Activision, we may see creative stagnation as they may just rely on established franchises and, for example, simply release a new Call of Duty game every year, instead of what they do right now which is release a new Call of Duty game every year.

To be fair they have one studio (IW) that does most of the actual innovation. The other studios lag behind a bit.

But Microsoft can't seem to create a new game or idea. Halo isn't as popular as it used to be and the sequel trilogy hasn't done as well. But Microsoft has in the past mentioned they can see another 10-15 years of Halo games. Likewise for Gears. Microsoft has a tendency to buy something and keep releasing a newer version of it and wondering why it stops selling. Maybe they will change tactics and allow Obsidian and other recently acquired studios to do their own thing rather than pump out sequel after sequel.

I wouldn't mind more frequent Fallout games though. Maybe one every 3-5 years rather than one ever 10+ years.

 

[Armenius]

To be fair they have one studio (IW) that does most of the actual innovation. The other studios lag behind a bit.

But Microsoft can't seem to create a new game or idea. Halo isn't as popular as it used to be and the sequel trilogy hasn't done as well. But Microsoft has in the past mentioned they can see another 10-15 years of Halo games. Likewise for Gears. Microsoft has a tendency to buy something and keep releasing a newer version of it and wondering why it stops selling. Maybe they will change tactics and allow Obsidian and other recently acquired studios to do their own thing rather than pump out sequel after sequel.

I wouldn't mind more frequent Fallout games though. Maybe one every 3-5 years rather than one ever 10+ years.

Sea of Thieves and Grounded are big hits.

 

[Lakados]

Sea of Thieves and Grounded are big hits.

My friends love Sea of Thieves, it's not my thing really but when they need a 3rd or 4th I have never said no.

 

[UnknownSouljer]

Update at the top of the OP. Microsoft having a private meeting with the EU commission next week to remedy objections to the merger.

https://mspoweruser.com/microsoft-t...erger-offer-remedies-at-eu-hearing-next-week/

 

[vegeta535]

Update at the top of the OP. Microsoft having a private meeting with the EU commission next week to remedy objections to the merger.

https://mspoweruser.com/microsoft-t...erger-offer-remedies-at-eu-hearing-next-week/

So they backing the money truck up to the EU next week?

 

[Derangel]

Which gaming IP has MS purchased and then platform-restricted?

Starfield's Playstation version was cancelled after MS bought Bethesda. While not outright stated (yet) it is almost a certainly that Elder Scrolls 6 will be exclusive to Microsoft platforms.

The first Outer Worlds title was released on PS4, XB1, PC, and Switch. The sequel is only releasing on PC and Xbox.

Hellblade 2 is only releasing on PC and Xbox even though the original was also on PS4 and Switch.

I feel like you haven't followed any of this story, the concessions Microsoft has already made or things they've already committed to/not-to.

All meaningless words unless it's enforced as part of a merger agreement. And even then, such concessions are time-limited and there will inevitably be loop-holes in the agreement that MS could use to entice players to their platform. Beyond that, any agreement would be about COD, leaving every other ActiBlizz property open to being made exclusive.

Here's a scenario to imagine that would be very likely with this merger: MS puts all the COD games on GamePass and heavily advertises this. As a new COD game is announced, it's announced as coming to multiple platforms, but it's going to be day one on GamePass and Ultimate subscribers would get a "free" upgrade to a more expensive edition of the game. You will still get a lot of people buying the PS versions since their friends all play there, but you would also see a huge surge in people getting PC or Xbox versions. Spend a decade doing this and MS can easily pull the player base away from Sony without breaking any of their current promises.

 

[vegeta535]

Starfield's Playstation version was cancelled after MS bought Bethesda. While not outright stated (yet) it is almost a certainly that Elder Scrolls 6 will be exclusive to Microsoft platforms.

The first Outer Worlds title was released on PS4, XB1, PC, and Switch. The sequel is only releasing on PC and Xbox.

Hellblade 2 is only releasing on PC and Xbox even though the original was also on PS4 and Switch.



All meaningless words unless it's enforced as part of a merger agreement. And even then, such concessions are time-limited and there will inevitably be loop-holes in the agreement that MS could use to entice players to their platform. Beyond that, any agreement would be about COD, leaving every other ActiBlizz property open to being made exclusive.

Here's a scenario to imagine that would be very likely with this merger: MS puts all the COD games on GamePass and heavily advertises this. As a new COD game is announced, it's announced as coming to multiple platforms, but it's going to be day one on GamePass and Ultimate subscribers would get a "free" upgrade to a more expensive edition of the game. You will still get a lot of people buying the PS versions since their friends all play there, but you would also see a huge surge in people getting PC or Xbox versions. Spend a decade doing this and MS can easily pull the player base away from Sony without breaking any of their current promises.

Man I hope CoD is not still relevant in 10 years. The series has become so stale.

 

[Armenius]

Man I hope CoD is not still relevant in 10 years. The series has become so stale.

Sales for each subsequent entry were declining until MW2 2022, but it still sells ridiculous amounts of copies even with the free Warzone.

 

[Westwood]

I'm thinking the numbers on World of Warcraft are on the up too. I've been playing almost solid for eighteen years now, and Dragonflight has that hook set DEEP. I don't what it is about the expansion, but its definitely one of the better ones.

 

[4saken]

Sales for each subsequent entry were declining until MW2 2022, but it still sells ridiculous amounts of copies even with the free Warzone.

yup not going anywhere. Stopped buying COD about 5 years ago, then the latest ones MW2022 made it fun again. I don't play them religiously but the series is a staple like Madden/etc now.

OT tho, ima sony fanboy with consoles, but being a big PC gamer, im OK with MS buying any studio since we get to play it free on PC with Xbox game pass.

 

[Comixbooks]

I skipped COD MW2 this year due to Shadow bans and being banned from COD for life.
The problem is hackers basically and the system was picking up non hackers and banning those people.

 

[UnknownSouljer]

So they backing the money truck up to the EU next week?

I assume a lot of promises promises. I'm hoping the EU doesn't buy it, honestly. However that isn't how things ever go.

 

[Lakados]

So they backing the money truck up to the EU next week?

Really the EU only cares because Sony paid them to care so now Microsoft has to pay them to not care again. Pretty sure that’s how it works.

 

[Flogger23m]

Starfield's Playstation version was cancelled after MS bought Bethesda. While not outright stated (yet) it is almost a certainly that Elder Scrolls 6 will be exclusive to Microsoft platforms.

The first Outer Worlds title was released on PS4, XB1, PC, and Switch. The sequel is only releasing on PC and Xbox.

Hellblade 2 is only releasing on PC and Xbox even though the original was also on PS4 and Switch.

They could be doing timed exclusivity but I doubt it. Maybe for some of the older games but again, I doubt it. I can see them putting older IPs like Fallout and Elder Scrolls on Playstation because those bring in massive sales. Maybe a year later because it will get people to buy an Xbox. I would think a timed exclusivity for those would still earn them more money. Every Playstation sale is still a sale for Microsoft.

For new games and things like Fallout Online 2 (if there is ever one) would probably be Microsoft exclusive. They want the Xbox Live subscription and single player games don't require that.

But there is a good chance all of those games will never be on a non-Microsoft console again.

 

[UnknownSouljer]

Turns out the FTC is also blocking the merger now.

https://www.ign.com/articles/ftc-xbox-playstation-activision-blizzard-cma-merger-analysis

The FTC’s argument against Microsoft is that by acquiring Activision Blizzard it would “substantially lessen competition” in the “relevant market,” per antitrust law as laid out in the Clayton Act. Effectively, the FTC believes that if Microsoft absorbed Activision Blizzard, their combined powers would allow them to monopolize the games market and hurt potential competitors like Nintendo or Sony in ways they couldn’t reasonably compete with.

 

[Starfalcon]

Turns out the FTC is also blocking the merger now.

https://www.ign.com/articles/ftc-xbox-playstation-activision-blizzard-cma-merger-analysis

The FTC’s argument against Microsoft is that by acquiring Activision Blizzard it would “substantially lessen competition” in the “relevant market,” per antitrust law as laid out in the Clayton Act. Effectively, the FTC believes that if Microsoft absorbed Activision Blizzard, their combined powers would allow them to monopolize the games market and hurt potential competitors like Nintendo or Sony in ways they couldn’t reasonably compete with.

Good

 

[Armenius]

Turns out the FTC is also blocking the merger now.

https://www.ign.com/articles/ftc-xbox-playstation-activision-blizzard-cma-merger-analysis

The FTC’s argument against Microsoft is that by acquiring Activision Blizzard it would “substantially lessen competition” in the “relevant market,” per antitrust law as laid out in the Clayton Act. Effectively, the FTC believes that if Microsoft absorbed Activision Blizzard, their combined powers would allow them to monopolize the games market and hurt potential competitors like Nintendo or Sony in ways they couldn’t reasonably compete with.

Sony outsold Microsoft globally 69-31 last year. If you throw Nintendo into that mix it's probably closer to 85-15. Seems to me that the acquisition would bring more competition into the relevant markets, not less.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/live-microsofts-activision-blizzard-press-conference-in-brussels

 

[Aurelius]

Sony outsold Microsoft globally 69-31 last year. If you throw Nintendo into that mix it's probably closer to 85-15. Seems to me that the acquisition would bring more competition into the relevant markets, not less.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/live-microsofts-activision-blizzard-press-conference-in-brussels

The FTC is concerned about the US market, where the Xbox has a considerably larger share. Don't forget, that info is coming from Microsoft as it defends its acquisition in front of the EU; it's not going to self-sabotage by disclosing market share data that hurts its case back home.

Microsoft has made commitments to Call of Duty on Sony and Nintendo platforms precisely because it knows that where the worries are. It's not a reach to suspect that Microsoft will make CoD a console exclusive on Xbox the moment its commitments are over, and will likely try to incentivize buying the Xbox version through staggered release dates, exclusive extras and the like.

 

[UnknownSouljer]

Sony outsold Microsoft globally 69-31 last year. If you throw Nintendo into that mix it's probably closer to 85-15. Seems to me that the acquisition would bring more competition into the relevant markets, not less.

https://www.gamesindustry.biz/live-microsofts-activision-blizzard-press-conference-in-brussels

To me the more obvious reason to block would be looking at the gaming market as a whole with PC gaming. A huge chunk of Activision/Blizzard is the PC market. It’s undeniable that they would be the most dominant by size by fairly large margin.

Ubisoft and EA have not nearly as much IP or share of the market like Microsoft will if this merger were to go through.

I personally don’t think it matters, in the sense that I should just consider all this IP dead. But people cling to IP they’re fans of even if it’s iterative trash or doesn’t have the original creators at the helm.

 

[Armenius]

To me the more obvious reason to block would be looking at the gaming market as a whole with PC gaming. A huge chunk of Activision/Blizzard is the PC market. It’s undeniable that they would be the most dominant by size by fairly large margin.

Ubisoft and EA have not nearly as much IP or share of the market like Microsoft will if this merger were to go through.

I personally don’t think it matters, in the sense that I should just consider all this IP dead. But people cling to IP they’re fans of even if it’s iterative trash or doesn’t have the original creators at the helm.

If it wasn't for World of Warcraft Activision Blizzard's PC share would not be that high. Even so, they still make more money on consoles than they do on PC.

https://investor.activision.com/new...d-announces-fourth-quarter-and-2022-financial

 

[Armenius]

The CCO of Activision Blizzard claims that CEO of Sony Interactive Entertainment Jim Ryan admitted aloud that Sony just wants to block the merger. They don't care about Call of Duty. This comes after Sony made the outrageous claim that Microsoft would intentionally sabotage the PlayStation version of Call of Duty to the UK Competition and Markets Authority

https://twitter.com/lulumeservey/status/1633573899400093699

 

[vegeta535]

The CCO of Activision Blizzard claims that CEO of Sony Interactive Entertainment Jim Ryan admitted aloud that Sony just wants to block the merger. They don't care about Call of Duty. This comes after Sony made the outrageous claim that Microsoft would intentionally sabotage the PlayStation version of Call of Duty to the UK Competition and Markets Authority

https://twitter.com/lulumeservey/status/1633573899400093699
View attachment 554868

I don't take that as Sony not caring about CoD. It is that want to keep the deal they currently have in place over what MS has proposed.

 

[Armenius]

I don't take that as Sony not caring about CoD. It is that want to keep the deal they currently have in place over what MS has proposed.

I would think that if Sony successfully blocks the acquisition that Activision Blizzard will no longer be interested in keeping their 3-month exclusivity of content on the console versions anymore

 

[Aurelius]

The CCO of Activision Blizzard claims that CEO of Sony Interactive Entertainment Jim Ryan admitted aloud that Sony just wants to block the merger. They don't care about Call of Duty. This comes after Sony made the outrageous claim that Microsoft would intentionally sabotage the PlayStation version of Call of Duty to the UK Competition and Markets Authority

https://twitter.com/lulumeservey/status/1633573899400093699
View attachment 554868

Did anyone think Sony would simply twiddle its thumbs or even support the merger? It's not in the company's best interests, and corporations aren't charities that do things out of the goodness of their hearts.

Sony is exaggerating here, but there is a legitimate concern that Microsoft will try a "death by a thousand cuts" approach to steer people toward Call of Duty on Xbox. Sure, there's a PlayStation version of the latest game... but it arrives weeks later, or doesn't get certain DLC items, or doesn't include features you know the hardware can handle. The worry isn't that Microsoft will reneg on an agreement to bring CoD to other platforms — it's that Microsoft will gradually make play on other platforms less desirable until that agreement is finished, at which point it makes the series an Xbox console exclusive knowing that people won't mind as much.

Besides, I still find it funny that people are trying to paint Sony as the meanie while backing Microsoft... you know, the company that has been repeatedly accused of abusing monopoly power and has long used acquisitions as a means of reducing competition. Not that Sony is an underdog, but Microsoft is hardly a victim here.

 

[Armenius]

Did anyone think Sony would simply twiddle its thumbs or even support the merger? It's not in the company's best interests, and corporations aren't charities that do things out of the goodness of their hearts.

Sony is exaggerating here, but there is a legitimate concern that Microsoft will try a "death by a thousand cuts" approach to steer people toward Call of Duty on Xbox. Sure, there's a PlayStation version of the latest game... but it arrives weeks later, or doesn't get certain DLC items, or doesn't include features you know the hardware can handle. The worry isn't that Microsoft will reneg on an agreement to bring CoD to other platforms — it's that Microsoft will gradually make play on other platforms less desirable until that agreement is finished, at which point it makes the series an Xbox console exclusive knowing that people won't mind as much.

Besides, I still find it funny that people are trying to paint Sony as the meanie while backing Microsoft... you know, the company that has been repeatedly accused of abusing monopoly power and has long used acquisitions as a means of reducing competition. Not that Sony is an underdog, but Microsoft is hardly a victim here.

Microsoft has no monopoly in the gaming market.

 

[Ragenrok]

It's funny to me how many people think that if this merger goes through that Xbox would be able to do anything they want to Sony. Microsoft knows full well that even if they get this to go through if they fuck with Sony it will just cause regulators to start looking at them harder.

Wouldn't be the first time large companies have been forced to see off parts of their buisness because of monopolistic practices, I think COD would have a constant target on its back from regulators that would keep any real bs moves from Microsoft in check.

What's more is Sony knows this, they have nothing to lose by making loud, obnoxious BS claims. If they win and block the merger, they are ecstatic. If they lose they know Microsoft can't retaliate in any meaningful way without causing issues for themselves.

 

[///AMG]

Microsoft getting the Activision Blizzard buyout deal through would absolutely screw Sony. Microsoft buying out AB and Bethesda is literally them trying to buy 15% of the console software revenues. Sony group as a whole does not have the revenue and profts Microsoft has, they will not be able to compete longer term with Microsoft. Microsoft will start to put all the games on Gamepass and eat even more losses on the service until they are the market leader. Gamepass is being sold at a loss, the pricing and value proposition is really hard to ignore. It will be great until microsoft dominates the market.

 

[Aurelius]

Microsoft has no monopoly in the gaming market.

That's not really the point. It's that Microsoft isn't some noble-minded actor here to save us from a tyrannical Sony, it's trying to buy its way to dominance. Cheering it on is like saying that all the cool, rebellious kids only listen to Top 40 pop... that is, you're really just championing another orthodoxy.

 

[sharknice]

Did anyone think Sony would simply twiddle its thumbs or even support the merger? It's not in the company's best interests, and corporations aren't charities that do things out of the goodness of their hearts.

Sony is exaggerating here, but there is a legitimate concern that Microsoft will try a "death by a thousand cuts" approach to steer people toward Call of Duty on Xbox. Sure, there's a PlayStation version of the latest game... but it arrives weeks later, or doesn't get certain DLC items, or doesn't include features you know the hardware can handle. The worry isn't that Microsoft will reneg on an agreement to bring CoD to other platforms — it's that Microsoft will gradually make play on other platforms less desirable until that agreement is finished, at which point it makes the series an Xbox console exclusive knowing that people won't mind as much.

Besides, I still find it funny that people are trying to paint Sony as the meanie while backing Microsoft... you know, the company that has been repeatedly accused of abusing monopoly power and has long used acquisitions as a means of reducing competition. Not that Sony is an underdog, but Microsoft is hardly a victim here.

Sony's argument has no merit stopping the buyout because Sony already does it to Microsoft.

Sony literally has paid for early DLC, tournaments to be played on Playstation hardware, and all sorts of the things like that. So Sony is worried that not only Microsoft will do it to them, but that they won't be able to do it to Microsoft. And it's nothing new, it's been going on forever in consoles. Hell, Sony even paid Valve not to release Half-Life on Dreamcast after review copies were sent out.


But ignoring Sony, would Micosoft buying Activision Blizzard benefit or hurt consumers? It could hurt consumers because their games may no longer be on Playstations, but it could benefit consumers because they could be better on PC/Xbox. For example Microsoft has shown a lot of interest in StarCraft but Activision/Blizzard have been essentially killing it off.

Honestly for games, which are exclusively used for entertainment value, I don't think any buyouts should be stopped. Especially since there are millions of games and new game studios get created every day.

 

[Armenius]

That's not really the point. It's that Microsoft isn't some noble-minded actor here to save us from a tyrannical Sony, it's trying to buy its way to dominance. Cheering it on is like saying that all the cool, rebellious kids only listen to Top 40 pop... that is, you're really just championing another orthodoxy.

Trying to buy its way to competition. PlayStation outsells Xbox 3:1 according to the data that has come out during this epic. Gaining 14% of software sales through an IP that Microsoft says they will continue to share, and has already committed to with Nintendo, is not going to give Microsoft any semblance of market dominance compared to Sony, let alone Nintendo. Microsoft is fighting to gain ground on the #2 spot in the gaming market. They have been a distant third for 10 years at this point.

 

[vegeta535]

There is no good guy bad guy here. It is just business. I guarantee MS would be pulling the same BS if Sony was buying up big developers.

 

[Lakados]

It's funny to me how many people think that if this merger goes through that Xbox would be able to do anything they want to Sony. Microsoft knows full well that even if they get this to go through if they fuck with Sony it will just cause regulators to start looking at them harder.

Wouldn't be the first time large companies have been forced to see off parts of their buisness because of monopolistic practices, I think COD would have a constant target on its back from regulators that would keep any real bs moves from Microsoft in check.

What's more is Sony knows this, they have nothing to lose by making loud, obnoxious BS claims. If they win and block the merger, they are ecstatic. If they lose they know Microsoft can't retaliate in any meaningful way without causing issues for themselves.

You don't get sued for being a monopoly by being a monopoly, you get sued for it by doing shit you can only do if you are a monopoly. Play nice and there is no legal standing to make a stink about it and Microsoft has learned that lesson the hard way, if the deal goes through I fully expect them to just start bundling everything they can getting it everywhere they can then use that as a pitch to try and get more people to subscribe for their game pass. Game pass wants to be a subscription-based Valve, and if they can flood it with what are essentially first-party titles then it becomes a very profitable thing long term.

 

[Aurelius]

Trying to buy its way to competition. PlayStation outsells Xbox 3:1 according to the data that has come out during this epic. Gaining 14% of software sales through an IP that Microsoft says they will continue to share, and has already committed to with Nintendo, is not going to give Microsoft any semblance of market dominance compared to Sony, let alone Nintendo. Microsoft is fighting to gain ground on the #2 spot in the gaming market. They have been a distant third for 10 years at this point.

Yes and no. While Microsoft is starting from a much smaller position, it's also trying to buy what's still one of the hottest IPs in console gaming and eventually steer everyone toward the Xbox version of that IP. And of course, Microsoft does have a monopoly in the PC industry that it might wield.

I look at it this way: if Apple bought a major social network like TikTok or Twitter, people would be nervous even though Apple has minority market share in phones and computers. Why? Because Apple would be hurting the overall market solely to boost its own share. The app ecosystem would ultimately be worse off even if Apple promised to support Android for 10 years.

 

[LukeTbk]

Seem ok for acquisition of that size to have to go through some process and that the opposition is founded by the competitor, that will obviously not be fair and just about it will be part of the norm.

It could hurt more to let it throught and then walk it back (like they want to do with google and others now).

Sony can say that obviously that will not happen with actual Call of Duty in the actual next few years, specially not when the console are so similar right now and the game already well running on sony online system.

And they cannot say Microsoft will offer it for quasi-free via gamepass to hurt Sony, legislator want instance that consumer are hurt by the acquisition not pleased and better for it, but that they are using that as an example of what could happen on a lesser title or in a mid-future, it is not that out of the possible for Microsoft to artificially hurt the title experience on the competition to make them look good.

 

[wizzi01]

Maybe, Sony should cancel all their exclusive deals right now if they want to play these games. I mean why does hogwarts legacy have a year exclusive dlc for playstation? They want to play the victim while being the perpetrator.

 

[Armenius]

Yes and no. While Microsoft is starting from a much smaller position, it's also trying to buy what's still one of the hottest IPs in console gaming and eventually steer everyone toward the Xbox version of that IP. And of course, Microsoft does have a monopoly in the PC industry that it might wield.

I look at it this way: if Apple bought a major social network like TikTok or Twitter, people would be nervous even though Apple has minority market share in phones and computers. Why? Because Apple would be hurting the overall market solely to boost its own share. The app ecosystem would ultimately be worse off even if Apple promised to support Android for 10 years.

While Activision Blizzard revenue is in the top 10 of video game publishers, by volume Call of Duty doesn't actually move that much more volume than other annual titles like FIFA. Proportional to the market it really is not that big of a deal. Apple acquiring TikTok would be more akin to Microsoft acquiring Tencent.

 

[UnknownSouljer]

https://arstechnica.com/?p=1923472

Sony explains why it wants the merger blocked: they don’t trust Bethesda.

Even if the CMA tried to enforce a so-called "behavioral remedy" to keep Call of Duty multi-platform, that move would not "address the myriad ways Microsoft could circumvent its obligations," Sony wrote. Sony also said Microsoft has a "history of non-compliance with behavioral commitments," pointing to Bethesda as well as previous broken commitments regarding Windows and Internet Explorer.

and

In its own filing with the CMA, Microsoft noted once again that it "has no intention of... making Call of Duty exclusive to the Xbox platform" and that its proposed agreements with Sony would mean the PlayStation versions would match those on Xbox "on release date, content, features, upgrades, quality, and playability." Microsoft proposed a monitoring trustee, an objective third-party assessor, and a fast-track dispute-resolution mechanism to help enforce those promises.

For Sony, though, it seems there is no enforcement regime or set of magic words that will make the company trust and accept Microsoft's ownership of Activision and Call of Duty. The only solution that Sony would accept is one proposed by the CMA itself: Microsoft fully divesting the Activision or Call of Duty businesses post-acquisition. The CMA is set to make its final decision on the matter by April 26.

 

[sirmonkey1985]

Microsoft has no monopoly in the gaming market.

they don't but allowing a merger like this opens pandora's door on game studio/publisher acquisition.. if a merger this large is allowed, ya might as well just pre-approve all further mergers for microsoft.