• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

FTC Seeks to Block Microsoft Corp’s Acquisition of Activision Blizzard

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
It makes sense. This is the fastest selling Xbox of all-time.

I'm still finding it a bit funny that people are referencing that document as if its a gotcha :messenger_tears_of_joy:

Looking forward to FTC getting trounced in the courts, again.

I hope the briefing went well comrade. I think I was missed off the mailing list this time, it’s probably because Philkun is ashamed of me for playing Stray recently.

Bad pussy!
 
Last edited:

jshackles

Gentlemen, we can rebuild it. We have the capability to make the world's first enhanced store. Steam will be that store. Better than it was before.
People, hear me out:
Is there a chance that Hendrick's Hendrick's is Craig of War?
craig-no-need-to-be-upset.gif
 

ZehDon

Member
Lmao did the geniuses at MS think that different regulatory bodies do not talk to each other?

image.png

[/URL][/URL]

MS told the EU during the Zenimax acquisition that they'd only make Zenimax games exclusive under implausible (their words) circumstances.

They lied. 100% chance CMA kills this deal now too.
Unless I'm mis-reading, point 108 stipulates that Microsoft would make Zenimax games exclusive only if it could determine that the number of Xboxes sold owing to those new exclusives out-paced the lost revenue from making it a single-platform exclusive. Given that Xbox is having its best generation ever right now, the "implausible scenario" has actually happened: Zenimax games being exclusive helped sell enough extra Xboxes that Microsoft makes more money in total than if they made them available on other platforms. That's not a lie: they literally said they'd do exactly what they are doing. Of course, given that no Zenimax games have actually launched yet, I'd be curious how Microsoft has come to that conclusion?
 
Last edited:

Swift_Star

Banned
I'm still finding it a bit funny that people are referencing that document as if its a gotcha :messenger_tears_of_joy:

Looking forward to FTC getting trounced in the courts, again.
The FTC thinks it’s a gotcha. Why do you think you’re better at this job than the FTC? Also, weren’t you one of the people that was sure the deal would go smoothly? If I were you, I’d be careful.
 

gothmog

Gold Member
The past data doesn't really work in their favour, which is part of their issue. Existing Bethesda games remain multiplatform, with newly funded and developed titles being exclusive - which of course they are. Previous purchases like Minecraft remain multiplatform, because the purpose of that purchase wasn't exclusivity. Microsoft literally signed a deal with Nintendo to bring COD to a whole new platform and offered Sony ten years of continued access. If ten years of legally binding access isn't enough, then what is? The idea that Microsoft are crossing their fingers behind their back when making pinky promises doesn't really work when we're talking legally binding agreements. Could Microsoft buy out those agreements? Sure - but then Sony and/or Nintendo would be paid the agreed amount to break those agreements, which is still a win for both of those companies. The claim that Microsoft will cut off access to Activision's content the day it closes and re-neg on its agreements doesn't track with Microsoft's history, especially under Nadella. They didn't pull Ghost Wire or Death Loop from being timed Sony exclusives - why would they re-neg on ten years of Sony and Nintendo paying them royalties?

The "force multiplier" doesn't really add up, either. The "emerging market" of streaming games is littered with the corpses of companies who tried and failed without Microsoft lifting a finger. On Live, Gaiki - who were purchased by Sony, Stadia. Those companies failed entirely on their own - in Stadia's case, basically from day one - because streaming games is a niche market. Geforce Now and PS Now are doing fine relatively, and neither of them have Activision's content anyway. Microsoft buying ABK doesn't really impact that emerging market to a degree demanding government intervention, because the market is still proving itself. It's not the FTC's job to look into a crystal ball and shape markets that don't fully exist yet because the FTC's current head doesn't like the past handling of Facebook, Apple, and Google's rise to prominence. This isn't a social media company buy a newspaper, this is a tech company who makes video games buying a big game to help it compete in one aspect of the market that's been dominated by one company for over twenty years, as well as establish foot holds in others, like Mobile. Microsoft can't use ABK to "force multiply" itself to become the Facebook of video games, video game streaming, or mobile - ABK, even under Micrsoft, simply doesn't have that kind of reach.
The current head of the FTC was approved with bipartisan support because she talked about reining in these tech giants. So that's what she's doing. Shes always making it public that they are outgunned by these companies.

I guess my only response to the rest is I disagree. The FTC made it clear and Microsoft argued things that are mostly unrelated to the complaint. They miscalculated and obviously tried very hard to sway the vote before it happened. I've repeated many times that the FTC considers things like divestiture as a remedy but Microsoft does not believe pretty much anything applies to them. Their whole COD 10 year deal dog and pony show proves they would rather focus on the sideshow rather than the concerns raised.
 
The FTC thinks it’s a gotcha. Why do you think you’re better at this job than the FTC? Also, weren’t you one of the people that was sure the deal would go smoothly? If I were you, I’d be careful.
Let's pump the breaks here. 100s of users in this thread, some far more than others, and on both sides, have spend pages and pages and pages proclaiming they know with certainty how this will all play out. So lets not point fingers at just one guy here.
 

The_Mike

I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
My question to everyone is this...

Microsoft have the deepest pockets on earth. Yet, throughout their gaming history their approach has been to swallow IP and publishers to get ahead. Why are they so averse to creating their own games and IP?
I love how people being blue snakes into their core keeps asking them selves that fanboy sentence question, while every non snake doesn't give a shit about their fake concern.

Also feels old to have clowns screaming xbox has no games in 2022.
 

ZehDon

Member
The current head of the FTC was approved with bipartisan support because she talked about reining in these tech giants. So that's what she's doing. Shes always making it public that they are outgunned by these companies.
Bipartisan support doesn't change the regulations the FTC uses; Khan's FTC is trying to reign in "tech giants" who aren't currently doing anything to be reined in under the regulations available to it. With no new laws or regulations, Khan's FTC is making noise for the sake of it. Again, she's trying to hold big tech companies to the fire for her perceived faults of other big tech companies. That's not how regulations work, and its why their probe into Amazon's MGM acquisition was a waste of effort. Same applies here, in my opinion.

I guess my only response to the rest is I disagree. The FTC made it clear and Microsoft argued things that are mostly unrelated to the complaint. They miscalculated and obviously tried very hard to sway the vote before it happened. I've repeated many times that the FTC considers things like divestiture as a remedy but Microsoft does not believe pretty much anything applies to them. Their whole COD 10 year deal dog and pony show proves they would rather focus on the sideshow rather than the concerns raised.
Fair enough, we don't have much more to say then. Best of luck.
 
Last edited:
It isn’t. Not when you steal all the time. Which is what MS do.
I agree, our supposed regulated market is terrible. Why this will go through with a slap on the wrist. “15 years of cod or so help me god.” All I can hope for myself is a benefit to me as the consumer Aka gamepass since it’s mostly to benefit their balance sheet.
 

skit_data

Member
Wow, I’m off the internet for like a day and this shit happens.

Well, no matter how you spin it I definitely don’t think MS expected this. It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Ok, so this is part of the script. Seen it a number of times already but we appreciate it.

What else you got?


Script ? I don't know if you guys do that, I'm just posting what's out there :messenger_grinning_sweat:


Maybe you should read it. The conditions set out in 108 were not met (and even deemed to be "implausible"), so why did Microsoft decide to go against what they claimed they would do considering it would, in their own words, make the venture unprofitable?

LfLb8Lk.png
BL0qQZS.png



116 outlines the reasons why they're exclusive, outcome is unlikely doesn't mean MS doesn't foresee those games as system sellers.

And 125 states that EU came to the conclusion that even afterward, there would be no material impact on the competition.

🤷‍♂️


such a weak fuckin argument about the zenimax deal. if thats all they got, these imbeciles are going to get embarrassed.

Very likely.
 
Last edited:

DJ12

Member
We shall see what happens in court. Someone will be eating crow for sure. I don't even care about the deal, I just want Sony exposed publicly. Looking forward to it.

Obviously no point in trying to have a conversation with you idiots. I'm out until the legal fight begins. Jim's going to be exposed.
Theres many issues with your post, but perhaps the biggest is Sony arent involved and if MS try the 'they did this' approach you seem intent on them doing they will definately lose.

Seek professional help immediately.
 

The_Mike

I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
EU & CMA blocking is what Will kill this Deal.

CMA Sony holds All the power in the UK, it's scary lol
Ftfy
That's fucking terrible job by the ftc. Now watch sony scoop up the cod devs/licenses when Activision dies off or worse tecent
It's not a terrible job when this is exactly what they are aiming for. To defend competition and not consumers.

I mean, they shouldn't, but they do.
 
Last edited:

DJ12

Member
These Microsoft ‘Goldilocks’ documents. Psychonauts 2, too cold for exclusivity… Minecraft, too hot for exclusivity…. But Starfield, just right 👌

TB2LNUZ.jpg
I assumed elder scrolls was the redacted game outed as exclusive in the ftc doc.

Yet here they are saying they need that ps money for it
 

gothmog

Gold Member
Bipartisan support doesn't change the regulations the FTC uses; Khan's FTC is trying to reign in "tech giants" who aren't currently doing anything to be reined in under the regulations available to it. With no new laws or regulations, Khan's FTC is making noise for the sake of it. Again, she's trying to hold big tech companies to the fire for her perceived faults of other big tech companies. That's not how regulations work, and its why their probe into Amazon's MGM acquisition was a waste of effort. Same applies here, in my opinion.


Fair enough, we don't have much more to say then. Best of luck.
Amazon/MGM went nowhere with the FTC because Khan didn't have the votes until late May. They were down two commissioners and had one confirmed earlier this year. They're still short one but you can't have more than three from the same party in the commission.

I'm still confused as to what specific regulation or laws you are referring to? This shit is pretty murky because it is making judgements based on risk and things like theories of harm.
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Maybe you should read it. The conditions set out in 108 were not met (and even deemed to be "implausible"), so why did Microsoft decide to go against what they claimed they would do considering it would, in their own words, make the venture unprofitable?
Yep. The exclusive announcement came well before stipulations could be met. And I still think it will be less revenue than if it were still third party since Bethesda games sold more on PS the past two gens, even more so now that you have a rental service and you admitted to losing $100-$200 per console unit sold. There be no profits in that regards.
 
Last edited:

Gavon West

Spread's Cheeks for Intrusive Ads
Why do you think this deal would be a good thing for the gaming industry? Honest question. I don’t know enough to say whether it’s good or bad.
It immediately makes Sony have to up their game and think outside of the box by adding some much needed competition to the mix in the gaming industry. That will ultimately assist devs by adding new jobs, bringing more creative minds into the fold, more innovation in gaming. This in turn benefits gamers ultimately as gaming will reach new heights in gameplay, visuals, etc. At the end of it all, gamers will benefit exponentially! Keeping the status quo only hampers real progress in this industry.

It's time to change the game, my boys!
 

anthony2690

Member
Sad Gordon Ramsay GIF by Hell's Kitchen's Kitchen


England has a top tier squad and probably the strongest if you look at subs. Have some faith.
Three Lions Football GIF
But it depends who turns up, if we come to play like we did against USA, oh boy.

I applaud your faith and belief though.

If it's as strong as your belief in bryank, then maybe I could believe too ;)
 
Last edited:

LiquidMetal14

hide your water-based mammals
So let's kind of get this straight in the fanboy or adolescent childish way some may be behaving.

Does this hurt Microsoft people that this may get rejected or more Sony people because some games nay not come to their platform?

These kinds of threads or content always divulge into the system war driven Photoshop fest.

Will anyone here lose sleep in this holiday season? Breathe!
 

Swift_Star

Banned
It immediately makes Sony have to up their game and think outside of the box by adding some much needed competition to the mix in the gaming industry. That will ultimately assist devs by adding new jobs, bringing more creative minds into the fold, more innovation in gaming. This in turn benefits gamers ultimately as gaming will reach new heights in gameplay, visuals, etc. At the end of it all, gamers will benefit exponentially! Keeping the status quo only hampers real progress in this industry.

It's time to change the game, my boys!
Sony is the only one innovating with VR.
What are you talking about?
 

Gavon West

Spread's Cheeks for Intrusive Ads
“Giving peace a chance”. All these Microsoft execs are so strange with their messaging. They sound entitled as fuck. I wonder if it’s a company culture thing…
Dude, it literally applies. They tried to accomplish the deal in peace talks. Since FTC is suing, going to court is effectively going to war. The reprecussions after this is done will change the gaming landscape for good, regardless of which way it goes.
 
Top Bottom