Support NeoGAF

[SF Kosmo]

Microsoft turning down Marvel games was the right decision at the time. If they would have accepted the deal, who exactly would have been making Spider Man? It wasn't going to be Insomniac as they already went back with Sony to work on Ratchet 2016. Microsoft had a handful of studios and none of them would have been free to develop a Spider Man game.

Should Microsoft make exclusive game deals for Marvel licensed games now? Absolutely. But back in 2014, they made the correct decision.

If Microsoft approached Insomniac as they were wrapping up Sunset Overdrive (again, this is the timing because the SO team was rolled onto Spider-Man, and R&C was another team), do you think Insomniac would have said no?

 

[Torrent of Pork]

The awkward moment where some Xbox fans on here love Ree now.

Not gonna lie I have Ree in my bookmarks under my Entertainment folder. It's like going on mental illness safari.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

I don't give a shit what it's about, truly. I was all for it the buyout because I think Activision is overvalued, but a decision like this on constitutional grounds is something so catastrophically destructive and wrongheaded that it will eventually reduce the country to a third world nation, and sorry WHATEVER THE FUCK you think this is about is not worth that.

Wait wat?

"so catastrophically destructive and wrongheaded that it will eventually reduce the country to a third world nation"


How?

 

[SF Kosmo]

It really and truly isn't. This activist court has been capping agencies one by one, ruling that the EPA and later the SEC have no ability to impose fines, and if they do the same to the FTC, it will completely remove the federal governments ability to impose meaningful regulations on industry.

Look at this country before the FTC was created, when it was just unlimited corruption and robber barons running everything, when the middle class didn't exist and America lived in poverty outside of a chosen few. The reality is, we will be a third world country eventually if that happens.

 

[Deleted member 471617]

If Microsoft approached Insomniac as they were wrapping up Sunset Overdrive (again, this is the timing because the SO team was rolled onto Spider-Man, and R&C was another team), do you think Insomniac would have said no?

It was in 2014 and Insomniac only worked with Microsoft because Sony passed on Sunset Overdrive as they wanted to own the IP (which they do now anyway, lol) while Microsoft let Insomniac keep the IP. Insomniac had already started working on Ratchet 2016 before Sunset Overdrive even released. So yes, I do believe that Insomniac would have said no but in the grand scheme of things, it didn't matter because Microsoft said no and I don't think Microsoft would have let Insomniac develop the game even if they wanted to because they were already getting burned by at the very least not owning the IP's (like Ryse, Sunset, etc.) and this would be an IP they wouldn't own and would be dependent on a studio that they don't own in Insomniac. Sure, Sony didn't own them either at the time but their relationship was much closer to where it was like they did own them. And of course, would do so five years later.

 

[Punished Miku]

I don't give a shit what it's about, truly. I was all for it the buyout because I think Activision is overvalued, but a decision like this on constitutional grounds is something so catastrophically destructive and wrongheaded that it will eventually reduce the country to a third world nation, and sorry WHATEVER THE FUCK you think this is about is not worth that.

I just don't think about it like that. I either think the acquisition is fair in the market or not. That's one opinion.

Totally separate from that is my opinion of the supreme court currently, on a whole host of issues and recent decisions, and what I think should be done about that. I wont get into that on this site.

I feel like it's kind of avoiding the solution if you think the SC is so unhinged that we can't pursue normal things for fear their hyper-partisan politics will damage the fabric of the country. The solution to that is not constantly avoiding them, it's addressing it.

 

[SF Kosmo]

Wait wat?

"so catastrophically destructive and wrongheaded that it will eventually reduce the country to a third world nation"

How?

They're essentially arguing that the FTC shouldn't be allowed to prevent any merger ever, not just this one, which means a return to the era of extreme monopolies that characterized the age of Robber Barons and mass corruption that was the Gilded Age.

The Supreme Court earlier this year already ruled that the EPA can't fine companies for violating envirionmental regulations, and the SEC can't impose fines for fraud. This is the sort of extreme activist court that would buy into this sort of argument. It's a very real risk.

I just don't think about it like that. I either think the acquisition is fair in the market or not. That's one opinion.

You're missing the point. The issue is not whether the merger happens or not, it's on what grounds, because that legal precedent could impact everything from now on. You might not think about it like that, but that's the reality of how our courts work.

 

[bxrz]

Chile approved the acquisition in Phase 1

FNE aprueba la adquisición de Activision Blizzard por parte de Microsoft Corporation

www.fne.gob.cl

 

[feynoob]

http://[URL]https://www.gameinforme...n-by-blocking-activision-blizzard-acquisition

[/URL]

I just hit my line. I'm done. Microsoft is attempting to exploit the partisan hack Supreme Court by raising a constitutional objection to the very notion of FTC enforcement, something that is so destructive to the few checks and balances we have left in our economic system that it could be the final blow in our slide to neo-feudalism. Sorry, Call of fucking Duty ain't worth that.

I have always been platform neutral/Team All the Systems, but fuck this.

We have talked this over couple pages ago.

I think it's better if you read their response at the end of the page.
They highlight what FTC violated.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Not gonna lie I have Ree in my bookmarks under my Entertainment folder. It's like going on mental illness safari.

You masochist, you!

 

[Punished Miku]

They're essentially arguing that the FTC shouldn't be allowed to prevent any merger ever, not just this one, which means a return to the era of extreme monopolies that characterized the age of Robber Barons and mass corruption that was the Gilded Age.

The Supreme Court earlier this year already ruled that the EPA can't fine companies for violating envirionmental regulations, and the SEC can't impose fines for fraud. This is the sort of extreme activist court that would buy into this sort of argument. It's a very real risk.

You're missing the point. The issue is not whether the merger happens or not, it's on what grounds, because that legal precedent could impact everything from now on. You might not think about it like that, but that's the reality of how our courts work.

The point is lawyers will always argue whatever they can to win. Your issue is the current actions of the SC itself. You can't really avoid them like you're suggesting. It's not how the country works. Lawsuits will always find their way to the SC, and they'll handpick the ones they want to rule on the most to push their agenda. If it's not this lawsuit, it'll be another. The actual issue you have will only be addressed directly.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

This is insanity. We went form:

"this acquisition is bad for the industry".

to:

"this acquisition is going to destroy America".

 

[feynoob]

Chille approval in english.

The FNE approved in Phase 1 the merger operation consisting of the acquisition of control of Activision Blizzard, Inc (ABK) by Microsoft Corporation (Microsoft), after ruling out that it is apt to substantially reduce competition.

These companies carry out activities in the same segments: development, publication and distribution of video games; and on different levels, with Microsoft producing the Xbox console and other video game platforms, such as GamePass, whereby their activities overlap both horizontally and vertically.

The Prosecutor's Office considered that the operation was not suitable to substantially reduce competition considering, among other evidence, patterns and preferences of video game consumers in Chile.

In its analysis of horizontal effects, the investigation ruled out risks, considering that in the markets in which the parties overlap their activities (development and publication of video games, distribution of computer video games and sale of merchandising and digital display advertising) the limits were not exceeded. market concentration thresholds established in the 2022 Horizontal Concentration Operations Analysis Guide , and that a large number of relevant competitors and a dynamic market were observed.

In the vertical risk assessment, the eventual blocking of inputs was ruled out, consisting of Microsoft, after acquiring ABK, ceasing to provide games like Call of Duty to its competitors. This considering, among other arguments, that ABK faces competitive pressure from players such as Electronic Arts, Take Two, Ubisoft and Epic Games, Sony and Nintendo, and that the relevance of Call of Duty would be comparatively less in Latin America than in other regions of the world.

It was also considered that the number of consumers who would prefer to change the console in the face of a blocking strategy would also be lower, which was verified through a survey carried out with Chilean consumers, and that the significant income generated by Playstation in favor of ABK would discourage adoption. of a blocking strategy.

In its analysis, the FNE also ruled out the risks of tipping in the marketing of next-generation consoles and in subscription services (such as GamePass), since ABK's video games, although important, are not the most relevant for game consumers. Latin America and that the players in this market offer highly differentiated services.

Tipping occurs when, once a certain scale of operation is exceeded, the markets tend to concentrate and eventually close under a single or dominant actor.

In relation to a possible risk of blocking customers, the Prosecutor's Office concluded that Microsoft will not stop demanding video games published by third parties, since the computer video game distribution market has shown significant dynamism with the entry of new relevant players, highlighting the leading position held by Steam .

On the other hand, in the video game distribution market for consoles there is significant competitive pressure from Sony and Nintendo, which would discipline the resulting entity and would operate as a relevant substitute client for competing publishers, including various players. and some of them are particularly relevant.

The parts

Microsoft operates worldwide developing activities in different technological segments. To analyze this merger, it is important to consider that Microsoft: (i) develops, publishes and distributes video games for computers, consoles and mobile devices; (ii) markets the Xbox console, which includes different generations of said device that have been released to date, and is also engaged in activities related to digital display advertising; (iii) offers the subscription service to video game catalogs of its own development and those of third parties, and the cloud gaming functionality ; and (iv) develops and sells the Windows operating system and software .

Activision Blizzard is dedicated to the development and publishing of video games for computers, consoles and mobile devices, through three business units that correspond to Activision Publishing, Inc., Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. and King Digital Entertainment. Among the main titles marketed by ABK, Call of Duty stands out , in addition to other games such as Crash Bandicoot, World of Warcraft and Candy Crush .

The respective report and resolution will be available via the web in the coming days, once any confidentiality claims that the notifying parties may present have been resolved.

 

[SF Kosmo]

The point is lawyers will always argue whatever they can to win. Your issue is the current actions of the SC itself. You can't really avoid them like you're suggesting. It's not how the country works. Lawsuits will always find their way to the SC, and they'll handpick the ones they want to rule on the most to push their agenda. If it's not this lawsuit, it'll be another. The actual issue you have will only be addressed directly.

It's true that someone would have tried eventually, but that doesn't absolve them of responsibility.

This is insanity. We went form:

"this acquisition is bad for the industry".

to:

"this acquisition is going to destroy America".

Because it's not about the acquisition itself, but the complete removal of the FTC's ability to regulate mergers at all. That's the argument they're making.

I agree it's insanity, but that's their play.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

It's true that someone would have tried eventually, but that doesn't absolve them of responsibility.


Because it's not about the acquisition itself, but the complete removal of the FTC's ability to regulate mergers at all. That's the argument they're making.

I agree it's insanity, but that's their play.

Is "pressure" nothing more.

 

[Punished Miku]

It's true that someone would have tried eventually, but that doesn't absolve them of responsibility.

That's fair. Their lawyers are fighting hard with anything they can. Lawyers are scummy, and couldn't care less. I'm sure all corporations couldn't care less.

The real issue is the ruling from the SC.

 

[feynoob]

Because it's not about the acquisition itself, but the complete removal of the FTC's ability to regulate mergers at all. That's the argument they're making.

I agree it's insanity, but that's their play.

For once, read the document, instead of actually going after that article.

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://fm.cnbc.com/applications/cn...221222_9412_Resp_Microsofts_Answer_PUBLIC.pdf

These proceedings are invalid because the structure of the Commission as an independent agency that wields significant executive power, and the associated constraints on removal of the Commissioners and other Commission officials, violates Article II of the U.S. Constitution and the separation of powers.

These proceedings are invalid because adjudication of the Commission’s Complaint by the ALJ and the Commission violates Article III of the U.S. Constitution and the separation of powers.

The Commission’s procedures arbitrarily subject Microsoft to administrative proceedings rather than to proceedings before an Article III judge in violation of Microsoft’s right to Equal Protection under the Fifth Amendment.

The Commission’s procedures violate Microsoft’s right to procedural due process under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

The structure of these administrative proceedings, in which the Commission both initiates and finally adjudicates the Complaint against Microsoft, violates Microsoft’s Fifth Amendment Due Process right to adjudication before a neutral arbiter.

These administrative proceedings violate Microsoft’s Fifth Amendment Due Process right to adjudication before a neutral arbiter as applied to Microsoft because the Commission has prejudged the merits of the instant action.

The Commission’s charges under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act are unlawful to the extent the Commission purports to apply Section 5 beyond the metes and bounds of the Sherman and Clayton Acts

 

[SF Kosmo]

We have talked this over couple pages ago.

I think it's better if you read their response at the end of the page.
They highlight what FTC violated.

Obviously they are throwing MANY arguments out there, most of which I have no problem with. But the ones that argue broadly that the FTC/Article III Courts have no authority to rule at all are incredibly dangerous, should this make it to the SC and they rule in support.

When courts rule on these, it's not a simple yes or no. The Judge will write a decision explaining the grounds for the ruling and which of these arguments they accept. If they accept these broad constituional arguments, that's incredibly destructive.

If they reject those arguments but allow the merger on other grounds, that's another matter.

 

[feynoob]

Obviously they are throwing MANY arguments out there, most of which I have no problem with. But the ones that argue broadly that the FTC/Title III Courts have no authority to rule at all are incredibly dangerous, should this make it to the SC and they rule in support.

When courts rule on these, it's not a simple yes or no. The Judge will write a decision explaining the grounds for the ruling and which of these arguments they accept. If they accept these broad constituional arguments, that's incredibly destructive.

If they reject those arguments but allow the merger on other grounds, that's another matter.

FTC went a head with the case, while not giving MS a chance. That is the issue here. FTC acted on their authority.

The problem isnt the decision, but the manner of the way the decision was made.

FTC still has to follow the rule of the land, as they are not above that.

 

[Dick Jones]

Did you not read how MS did not want to use IP they did not own? Also Insomniac essentially was a Sony 2nd party. What are you even trying to argue? If they were working on Sunset Overdrive how would they also be working on a random Marvel IP? You speak like Spiderman was finished and awaited a MS final approval to be released.

How could Insomniac work on both Sunset Overdrive and Spider-Man? Tweet Ted Price I igTedPrice and ask him how the fuck he did it.

Insomniac made both Sunset Overdrive and Spider-Man. You have to be trolling here with that lazy comment. At that time of rejection of Marvel IP, Insomniac were also known for releasing multiple games in the same year (multiple projects means they could do both... and as it turns out they did both).

Insomniac were independent at this stage and were open to working on non Sony exclusives (see Sunset Overdrive). It was incompetence that cost Xbox a Spider-Man exclusive.

You can have a policy of working only on IP you own but, when certain opportunities come up you grab them. Marvel were on fire post Avengers 2012. In 2014 GotG was released in the cinema and raked in cash. In 2013, the public hadn't a clue who they were.

 

[SF Kosmo]

FTC went a head with the case, while not giving MS a chance. That is the issue here. FTC acted on their authority.

The problem isnt the decision, but the manner of the way the decision was made.

FTC still has to follow the rule of the land, as they are not above that.

Again, these are incredibly broad arguments that aren't specific to this merger but truly any enforceable action by the FTC to prevent any merger.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Microsoft Says FTC Violates The Constitution By Blocking Activision Blizzard Acquisition

In a response to the FTC, Microsoft defends the legality of its $69 billion deal.

www.gameinformer.com

I just hit my line. I'm done. Microsoft is attempting to exploit the partisan hack Supreme Court by raising a constitutional objection to the very notion of FTC enforcement, something that is so destructive to the few checks and balances we have left in our economic system that it could be the final blow in our slide to neo-feudalism. Sorry, Call of fucking Duty ain't worth that.

I have always been platform neutral/Team All the Systems, but fuck this.

Whoa… how bold and brave MS, in order to protect gaming they are willing to throw the FTC under the bus going to the Supreme Court over this full of the appointees it was not shy in criticising when Trump was rushing them through . Yeah, you know the intentions are good when any sense of shame is thrown to the curb.

 

[The_Mike]

It ends with the world greenlighting this and the ftc still crying over it.

 

[DeepEnigma]

This is insanity. We went form:

"this acquisition is bad for the industry".

to:

"this acquisition is going to destroy America".

Where were you early on when some were saying that the EU/UK needs MS more than MS needs them and those countries would be bomba third world if MS pulled out of doing business there?

The clowning stays clowning up in here.

 

[feynoob]

Again, these are incredibly broad arguments that aren't specific to this merger but truly any enforceable action by the FTC to prevent any merger.

Broad argument, which MS has a high chance to win, if they took it to the supreme court.

You dont play around by breaking the rules. Even if the case is high class case.

 

[Panajev2001a]

It ends with the world greenlighting this and the ftc still crying over it.

FTC will rubber stamp it, CMA is wasting its time … FTC is wasting its time <insert other body> will rubber stamp it.

Fine make this argument, but not if you are ever crying another Pro Consumer storm in a teacup after this … what am I saying of course it will happen.

 

[feynoob]

Where were you early on when some were saying that the EU/UK needs MS more than MS needs them and those countries would be bomba third world if MS pulled out of doing business there?

The clowning stays clowning up in here.

I was here before that.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Microsoft turning down Marvel games was the right decision at the time. If they would have accepted the deal, who exactly would have been making Spider Man? It wasn't going to be Insomniac as they already went back with Sony to work on Ratchet 2016. Microsoft had a handful of studios and none of them would have been free to develop a Spider Man game.

Should Microsoft make exclusive game deals for Marvel licensed games now? Absolutely. But back in 2014, they made the correct decision.

Insomniac has 2 studios in different cities altogether: one in California and the second one in North Carolina. The Ratchet & Clank studio didn't make Spider-Man. Phil could hire the second studio to work on Spider-Man, just like Sony did.

 

[reksveks]

Microsoft is jumping on the Axon bandwagon, this was always going to come up.

 

[DeepEnigma]

It ends with the world greenlighting this and the ftc still crying over it.

Even countries MS doesn't even sell their Xbox's in, you know, the most important regions in all this drama.

 

[nikolino840]

Chille approval in english.

Good

 

[feynoob]

Fine make this argument, but not if you are ever crying another Pro Consumer storm in a teacup after this … what am I saying of course it will happen.

There is really nothing pro consumer about it.

Its fine, if xbox needs to strenthen their studios and gamepass, but to use the pro consumer is not a good argument for anyone.

This is like Disney buying marvel and fox, while people cheering for them.

Consumers are gold fish. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Banjo64]

Where were you early on when some were saying that the EU/UK needs MS more than MS needs them and those countries would be bomba third world if MS pulled out of doing business there?

The clowning stays clowning up in here.

Probably the funniest series of posts (can’t remember the user) in this whole thread.

Then again, someone also said that MI5 might pressure the CMA.

 

[feynoob]

Even countries MS doesn't even sell their Xbox's in, you know, the most important regions in all this drama.

Scenes when Japan approves this merge, while ftc blocked the deal.
It would be hillarous here.

 

[DeepEnigma]

There is really nothing pro consumer about it.

Its fine, if xbox needs to strenthen their studios and gamepass, but to use the pro consumer is not a good argument for anyone.

This is like Disney buying marvel and fox, while people cheering for them.

Consumers are gold fish. Nothing more, nothing less.

Facts.

Scenes when Japan approves this merge, while ftc blocked the deal.
It would be hillarous here.

Sony pulls out of Japan!

 

[SF Kosmo]

Broad argument, which MS has a high chance to win, if they took it to the supreme court.

Based on this particular court's utter disregard for precedent and rule of law, perhaps. But no other court at any time in the last century would accept that argument.

You dont play around by breaking the rules. Even if the case is high class case.

These are the rules as they have been understood for over 100 years. To suddenly argue they are invalid because you know there's a court who doesn't care about the law isn't just arguing in good faith.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Where were you early on when some were saying that the EU/UK needs MS more than MS needs them and those countries would be bomba third world if MS pulled out of doing business there?

The clowning stays clowning up in here.

So, you accept there are homologous to you on the other side?

 

[feynoob]

Sony pulls out of Japan!

That would make the climax reach insanity level.

 

[DeepEnigma]

So, you accept there are homologous to you on the other side?

No, but Kosmo has more weight if the argument is indeed "dissolve the FTC' which I have seen clowns saying in here and online. But with that said, I don't see that happening, ever.

We all pro globalist big business now, fam! The brand love even got commie Bernie supporters to walk back on Bernie's anti big business rhetoric he's always propagated in his living off the taxpayer career.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

No, but Kosmo has more weight if the argument is indeed "dissolve the FTC' which I have seen clowns saying in here and online. But with that said, I don't see that happening, ever.

We all pro globalist big business now, fam! The brand love even got commie Bernie supporters to walk back on Bernie's anti big business rhetoric he's always propagated in his living off the taxpayer career.

I am not American so whatever.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Scenes when Japan approves this merge, while ftc blocked the deal.
It would be hillarous here.

Sony and Microsoft to their respective regulatory bodies after that:

 

[DeepEnigma]

I am not American so whatever.

 

[Punished Miku]

No, but Kosmo has more weight if the argument is indeed "dissolve the FTC' which I have seen clowns saying in here and online. But with that said, I don't see that happening, ever.

We all pro globalist big business now, fam! The brand love even got commie Bernie supporters to walk back on Bernie's anti big business rhetoric he's always propagated in his living off the taxpayer career.

Your brain is being rewired to secrete too much dopamine from trolling. You need a detox lol.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Your brain is being rewired to secrete too much dopamine from trolling. You need a detox lol.

You should charge per therapy session.

 

[Punished Miku]

You should charge per therapy session.

Therapy is free for all in communism. Just happy to help the cause.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Therapy is free for all in communism. Just happy to help the cause.

Free like Gamepass games?

 

[The_Mike]

Therapy is free for all in communism. Just happy to help the cause.

Yeah I don't know if I would prefer this form for therapy.

 

[SlimySnake]

Spider-Man was an inside job!

Whats insane is that we have Marvel and Insomniac execs on record telling us exactly how that deal came to be. Marvel went to Sony first party to ask them if they wanted to make a Marvel game with them. Sony said no, but recommended Insomniac who were third party at the time. Insomniac jumped at the chance and they were then given a choice to pick ANY superhero. They just happened to pick Spiderman. It had nothing to do with the movie deal.

We now know that Marvel went to every studio and publisher with the same deal. Square Enix made Avengers and Guardians. EA and Microsoft passed on the deal. EA has seen the error of their ways and is now finally making Black Panther and Iron Man.

MS is still MIA while Sony is making ANOTHER Marvel game that Xbox couldve made in the last six years. And god knows what else they have unannounced. Captain America, Hulk, Thor, and X-Men are all available. Marvel is literally handing them out like candy and MS is like nah we will make Redfall, State of Decay and Everwild instead.

 

[Punished Miku]

Free like Gamepass games?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Ebb and flow, my man. Ebb and flow.