The Microsoft / Activision Blizzard acquisition |OT| Antitrust Simulator OT
How much equity should we put in equityreportuk? My knowledge in firms specialising in m&a news is severely lacking. Edit seems pretty decent, just small.
www.resetera.com
Idas posted on a report regarding the CMA at the link above if anyone missed it.
Just to help get things back on track here.
If they haven't offered remedies yet, I suspect that the PF is likely going to be negative but it also won't mean that we get a clear picture on if this is going through or not. We in it for the long haul.
and MS is fighting for 'consumers'?
of course these companies don't care about the 'other guys' consumers; why should they? Its a business; the bottom line is the only thing they care about.
You think MS gave a fuck about Sony consumers when they bought Bethesda?
I'm leaning towards what Idas has been saying, that they're going to approve it without remedies. After this lengthy analysis it's hard to see them coming to a different conclusion to all the other regulators that approved it and the legal experts that think it should go through.
Wait, we're considering delays to be mismanagement?
Y'all know Sony's entire slate last year were games that were delayed from the year before, right?
That would be ideal and it would drive a spear into the FTC's heart, but too optimistic for me! I think it's 100% going to need remedies to pass.
I don't know if I would entirely agree with that, the line of thinking that Xbox can't spend as much as they want hasn't played out over the years, well until recently specifically with Bethesda and Activision. Do you not agree that their strategy of Game Pass or nothing puts them at a disadvantage for these kinds of timed exclusive or even marketing deals. It's got to cost considerably more to not only be exclusive to a platform but also on a sub service day 1 cutting into your full priced sales.
I'm basing it off you saying Sony are using their market position to make it difficult for Xbox to pivot to their Game Pass strategy. It just seems like business as usual for marketing deals, the leaked info specified RE8 could not be on Game Pass for several years after launch Well RE8 had / still has marketing with PlayStation two years later for the initial release and the VR update.
It is literally the same spice as always, though :p
I'm pretty sure there is not a single soul in this thread that has argued that MS needs COD to survive in the industry. What we have argued is that MS needs something more than what they're doing now that challenges the fundamental position of the incumbents if they ever hope to be on an "even playing field" with PlayStation without Sony yeeting themselves into the sun (or accidentally incite some gamer riot or whatever). ABK is an example of that. And it's an example that is so large that it is truly incomprehensible - and YET EVEN SO, we are arguing that it would STILL not completely reverse the power dynamics in this industry.
I have trouble believing that many of the people in this thread actually believe that Sony would be unable to compete if MS owned ABK and still published every single COD on PlayStation for 10 years. Like. None of you think that. And none of you believe that Sony couldn't find a response to COD (again, less than 6% of their revenue) going exclusive with 10 years of notice. THAT would be evidence of mismanagement.
What we're arguing is not that MS needs COD. It's that MS needs something at COD's scale - and probably even more on top of that. And we think it's ludicrous to suggest that MS is going to get there by localizing more games (it is), funding more exclusives (it is), moneyhatting some games (it is), marketing more (it is, maybe less now), Game Passing harder, or whatever else business-as-usual suggestion has been given. The evidence and logic just do not add up. Meanwhile we're seeing evidence that MS's acquisitions have helped with rehabilitating their image, improving the work environment (along with broader culture shifts, though not without issues), and regaining market share. That's good for everyone in the industry and for players. And none of it has hurt Sony whatsoever.
Delays, the management of studios, and quality of MGS releases are issues of mismanagement, yes.
I said before, when Xbox challenged the fundamental position of the incumbents by going the traditional route with the 360, there was no backlash and PlayStation yeeted nothing into the sun. They have not gone back to the traditional route since, yet all focus is on how PlayStation is in an indomitable position.
Why is it not that Xbox has put themselves into this position with their own initiatives and company directives instead of PlayStation being an insurmountable brand?
What if the acquisition goes through, and their is still a loss or neutral gain of marketshare? Is that not a call for them to refocus on what actually worked for them in the past?
I understand this deal is guaranteed to give them a foothold in the mobile arena. I'm speaking solely on the defined "high-end console market".
Last edited:
People keep bringing up one singular thing or game as a rebuttal but the issue isn't one or two games getting delayed or a game flopping. It's a pattern that we've seen across multiple years and games. I'm not sure if ABK will help them with that but it should at least give them a big title to put into GP.
It is business as usual… which is why I said it's fair game. I just don't consider it " staying on their toes". Paying for individual deals like this has proven to be cheaper, and more impactful for someone in Sony's position. Which is why MS has shifted towards Gamepass and strategic acquisitions.
Damn. Well can't argue with that. I'm ashamed of my words and deeds.
I think there is very real concern (stemming from their contractor mandate) that MGS is more willing to invest in IP than in people, but this seems to be less of an issue with the Acti-Blizz merger as they are pushing for unionization of Acti-Blizz employees, and they've largely been hands-off with Bethesda & Mojang from what we've heard.
I am sorry but this is a half-true, Microsoft just announced 10k layoffs and Bethesda was affected by that (a recently Microsoft adquisition).
Probably for the best, nothing happening until next week.
Let's all just rest until next week when the Provisional Findings report comes from the CMA
It's pretty clear that 2-3 people are posting in bad faith and they shouldn't be engaged on their nonsense anymore.
Wait until the next update, every time there is an update there is a new batch of people who storm into the OT and it's hilarious because they don't follow a single thing then come in and say something completely wrong as fact, don't get me started on all the fresh alt accounts that tend to plagued this OT.
I love the drama between MS, Sony and regulators but the drive by posts and console wars that pop up here is a bit much. One of the best things though like you said is the ignore button because it makes the whole site much better, this thread tends to bring those sorts of people out.
This thread is my ignore farmer. Pop in here from time to time to update the list
Well delays that are most coming from the director/change in leadership would probably classify as mismanagement. Kind of a reason why games like Halo Infinite ended up being the way they are. Sill no clue if it affected Perfect Dark's internal release date or not.
So is next week finally when something important will be shown or can they still delay the delay of the delay?
Nah. I disagree on this. It's not how "console business is done"... it's how business is done, period. Exclusivity exists in all markets, products compete via differentiation, and having a differentiating factor be "exclusive" to your product is something business seek all the time, right down to supermarkets having exclusive brands on sale, or ticket vendors having the exclusive rights to sell tickets for a given artist, or Netflix having exclusive shows. Gamer reaction doesn't rewrite the general rules of capitalism.
I do understand the PC gaming community pushing back on EGS, but I also think it's important to somewhat step back and reframe what is being referred to as the PC gaming community here. What you call the PC gaming community is by and large the Steam community. Steam just so happens to be so incredibly dominant in that space that the two terms are largely viewed interchangeably. This reaction actually isn't notably different from that of say RoTR within the console market. People push back and argue against the cases which impact them directly... and the more dominant one player in the market is the more lopsided this dynamic becomes. I'm sure there are a good number of GoG loyalists who would love every game on Steam to also release there, just as many Xbox fans would like to have received Final Fantasy 7R day and date with PS... but they're so far off being the majority that there isn't a lot of noise to be made there. When the opposite occurs however, it obviously has a more direct impact on the majority, and so it becomes a huge uproar, with those invested in the larger platform declaring how wrong it is for their platform and its users to be deprived or impacted in any way.
This is what causes the snowball effect of brand loyalty, and why a smaller player in a market segment can't simply play the game in the same manner as the more dominant player. Not only is it much cheaper for the larger player to acquire exclusive content (compensating for sale of 10% of the market is massively cheaper than for 60%), but you're also going to have far fewer people become angry with you. Those people WILL become angry regardless though, not matter what avenue of exclusivity you pursue. The only exception is if the larger player does something to immediately eradicate all of their good will, to the extent that the userbase demands to see the current king replaced immediately.
Yea, exactly. And the price tag on an exclusive Final Fantasy would be so much higher in their case, that if they tried to pursue it multiple times over in the way PlayStation has, they will soon have spent what it would cost upfront to just own Final Fantasy.
It is supposed to be next week, yeah.
But be wary of the delay as always.
Eh. PlayStation ABSOLUTELY yeeted themselves into at least the moon to begin PS3. And I'd even argue that's what ALLOWED Xbox to take the "traditional approach". You think they'd have been able to sign all those exclusivity deals with devs who didn't want to develop for Cell if PlayStation hadn't alienated them to begin with? Hell no. The reason MS haven't gone back to the traditional route is because the traditional route primarily benefits the market leader who has all the entrenched advantages (and also because they weren't getting funding in the 2010s). Not even Nintendo follows this "traditional" route. Unless your definition of traditional route is "anything that MS isn't doing".
I feel like you're trying to convince me that Xbox has made mistakes... Yes, we know LOL. We complain it all day in the Xbox OT! haha. That's just reality, just like it's just reality that Sony has an insurmountable market power lead (which I think is much more entrenched and much more meaningful than a console marketshare lead or a revenue lead). The question isn't if Xbox is a bad dog, but what Xbox can do now to compete well in this market moving forward and continue to provide a GOOD alternative to Nintendo and PlayStation.
If you think that buying ABK isn't going to significantly help MS, then... yea, I guess that's even less reason to be against this. Either way, its unlikely to harm Sony, who will get almost of the benefits with none of the costs. So, yea, I DON'T expect this acquisition to shift the marketshare significantly. Again, even less reason to be against this. Or maybe you're worried that MS is going to ruin ABK.... more... than it already has itself...? Hm.. I obviously don't have a crystal ball, but.. iono. I just have a hard time finding reasons to actually be worried about this from any angle except the market leader not wanting to give up market power.
It seems like the end of Season 1 cliffhanger is really driving people loopy. Feels like the same old tired arguments the last few pages we've had a million times before. But getting slightly more toxic.
MS will be fine. Sony will be fine. Xbox and PlayStation will continue to coexist for the foreseeable future. Regardless of what happens with this deal. And both are investing more money in original content than they've ever done before, so everyone wins.
MS will be fine. Sony will be fine. Xbox and PlayStation will continue to coexist for the foreseeable future. Regardless of what happens with this deal. And both are investing more money in original content than they've ever done before, so everyone wins.
At least it's not for the harassment, it's just for failing to disclose it properly. So presumably there will be further (larger) fines.
That stuff happens at all studios, Nintendo, Sony, EA, Ubisoft, Rockstar, Capcom, etc etc... just because it's not always reported doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
Lol.
If only ever single piece of media that ended up being delayed or didn't hit high quality by critics were fragments of mismanagement. Alas, you don't see anyone claiming that. Because it is not. It's somewhat common ocurrences for any creative project, ESPECIALLY when the pandemic delayed literally every companies projects. But here we are with people coming with the mental gymnastics to fit these as a sign of "mismanagement" just so they can justify their baseless "Microsoft can't manage studios" narrative.
With each new update, comes a new batch of people with the mental gymnastics to try to somehow prove why this acquisition shouldn't go through.
Just want this acquisition to be over with. Next week can't come soon enough.
Excuse me. We all agreed I was right and moved on. Dredging up the past is in poor taste.
This, I wonder how many games are rebooted canceled at these other entities but its just not reported because they dont' leak.
I am happy they made them pay, but JFC that's a pittance for such a large company...
Heck, just look at all the Zelda cancelled projects during the NDS-Wii era that was recently discovered by DYKG investigative pieces. It's extremely common in the gaming industry.
Other platform holders seem to have figured it out except the one that has spent $10B+ in studios in the past five years. Either way, it was off-topic and I've tried to move on but keep getting quoted.
The masses would have you believe that its not as common as it probably is though. However, I will wait until the next week for more info on the topic at hand.
You're right, no other platform holder has ever had a delayed game or a botched launch.
You actually believe some fans of Xbox and video game fans in general speak of Xbox studios' mismanagement simply to rail against this acquisition?
Said companies don't have a right to do business in a foreign country if they won't follow the marketplace regulations. There are always the options of 1) ignoring the regulatory findings and facing fines/sanctions or 2) withdrawing from the market.