390°

Analysts see CMA objection to Activision Blizzard acquisition as a sign deal will go through

Wedbush's Nick McKay and Michael Pachter see provisional finding as "a signal that the UK knows it has a losing legal argument," expect deal to close by mid-May

Read Full Story >>
gamesindustry.biz
MrDead459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

Can anyone think of a bigger anti-gamer company than MS? Every successful platform has been able to make content to grow it's reach except the one owned by one of the wealthiest corporations in the world. I knew as soon as MS stopped making games halfway through the 360 era that them buying up the industry would be inevitable.

Why make games and add to the community when you can spend 10's of billions to take what's already there.

As true as it was 20 years ago as it is today, U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, Microsoft Corp. uses monopoly power to harm potential competitors could accelerate a dilution of the company’s once-unquestioned dominance over the software industry. "Microsoft has demonstrated that it will use its prodigious market power and immense profits to harm any firm that insists on pursuing initiatives that could intensify competition against one of Microsoft's core products,"

Aloymetal459d ago

MS realized long time ago they couldn't/can't beat PlayStation/Nintendo in the popularity, software and hardware department around the globe, they just don't have the clout to come on top so buying the industry forcing their way in was/is their only option. Their already 6 yr old service aka Gamepass is just Phil's & Co. latest ''gimmick'' to keep the xbox brand somehow relevant but it's clear it hasn't changed anything, they are still last on everything. Another sad attempt that feels like ''throw 'em up against the wall hoping to see which ones stick.''

Hofstaderman459d ago

I wonder if one of these analysts is somebody named Micheal Patcher?

mkis007459d ago

I would add one thing to your first sentence:

They don't want to take the risk and time to make themselves into a top publishing/ developing house. They want the baby without the labour pains. Ms more than any other company could have totally afforded taking the time to grow the industry, but instead chose to shrink it.

thesoftware730458d ago (Edited 458d ago )

I get it, and understand that you and some others don't like MS.but to call GP a "gimmick" is kinda silly at this point, all 3 of the big boys have a similar service, MS just takes that service as their front business model.

And the whole buying rights to games, devs, and pubs are all part of that model. MS is attempting to do what Netflix, Disney, Apple, WB, and Amazon have done with streaming services, you have to purchase content to fill a service like that, and the business model calls for it, I agree that beating Sony the traditional way of measuring successful consoles was not working, so they had to take a different model approach, now it's about how many subs can they sell, not just consoles.

Their acquiring dev/pubs is to keep GP filled with content, like I said just like Netflix, you have to keep dropping content.

Lifexline459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

That’s reality what’s the point of crying when someone does something that’s legal acquiring a company is not illegal.

Everyone has done it acquired other companies to grow Sony and Nintendo did it. The only difference is Microsoft has way more money to buy at larger scale same concept. What’s the difference between buying 20 small developers and acquiring 20 developers in one sitting? Please don’t give me that they nurtured them that’s a bogus argument it’s a cop out.

I do see that the CMA was t as harsh so they do some open to negotiating that’s what I took it as.

crazyCoconuts459d ago

Size matters. And it's legal until a regulatory agency tells you it's not. It's not like there's some calculation you can use to determine if any given country is going to call it anti-competitive. So it's complicated and gray. A lawyer's paradise.

GamingSinceForever459d ago

It’s sort of like pay to win with online games. The really good players grind it out to earn their goods, but then you have this micro transaction option where players can pay real money t get even or ahead of the good players.

It’s not illegal but it is frowned upon. That’s really what this acquisition looks like.

sinspirit459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

It's not the same concept. The bigger the boat, the bigger the wave. That's like saying "same difference". If it's different.. it's not the same.

How is the nurturing argument a cop out? What do you think makes it irrelevant as a good point?

mkis007459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

Shrinking the gaming industry is the answer to your inquiry. Buying a dev every 5 years, ones that already worked for you exclusively, isnt going to rock the industry. As a matter of fact sony bought the developers themselves, they already own all the ip's (except destiny of course). Ms literally bought a ton of IP's they didnt own before, they could have invested in their devs new ideas instead.

In sony's place nothing was lost, the games are still releasing where they were releasing before.

In Xbox case the games will dissappear from one platform. The money too. Day one Gamepass is not conducive to reinvesting in bigger games...just the opposite, smaller games will be coming out because the dev time is shorter.

Lifexline459d ago

The whole nurturing argument is a cop out because Sony did not create those studios a group of hardworking people did the studio heads and worked their asses off to make them successful and the majority of those studios they acquired also made games for other platforms as well.

So Sony was not the only one who helped them or made them successful the studio itself did. It’s the same concept Sony took those studios off the market even though they made games for other platforms as well. This excluding their games for certain gamers what’s the difference. A lot of those games that were multiplatform or for other platforms just weren’t as successful which is why most Sony fans think they only made games for Sony. But I bet they poured their hearts out for those games but no one can control whether a game is a hit or miss. Gamers are very finicky.

ChasterMies458d ago (Edited 458d ago )

I mean, you could look up the Wikipedia page for antitrust.

343_Guilty_Spark458d ago

@GamingSinceForever

Businesses take "short cuts" all the time. Play to win is why they are in business.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 458d ago
CrimsonWing69459d ago

I think you’re overreacting.

Is COD the only reason you’re on a PlayStation? If it goes to MS you can play it on PC for chrissakes. If you don’t have a PC and it’s the end of the world for you that this happened then just buy a used Xbox Series S. It’s cheaper than some collector’s editions for a single game.

Exclusives are a reality of a competitive market. Obviously MS needs some exclusives to make their platform appealing to consumers because it sure as sh*t doesn’t have much.

Sony will be fine and if anything they need to try to fill the gap with something better for that audience.

People are so melodramatic on here, I swear…

EvertonFC459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

Or always allow/give playstation gamers the chance of buying cod physical or digital while being on GP after buying them?

CrimsonWing69459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

@EvertonFC

Sure, that’s a possibility.

MrDead459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

So the FTC, the CMA and the EU are being melodramatic?

Also it's not just COD it's also games such as Crash Bandicoot, Guitar Hero, Tony Hawk's, Spyro, Skylanders, World of Warcraft, StarCraft, Diablo, Hearthstone, Heroes of the Storm, Overwatch and all future activision Blizzard games.

Try again.

Christopher459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

***If it goes to MS you can play it on PC for chrissakes. If you don’t have a PC and it’s the end of the world for you that this happened then just buy a used Xbox Series S. It’s cheaper than some collector’s editions for a single game.***

Yeah! Fewer options are better than the greater number of options we have now! Stop whining! This is a win for gaming!

***People are so melodramatic on here, I swear…***

The irony.

Binarycode459d ago

Nobody in their right mind wants to buy and Xbox. It's been garbage since the 360 era. Has the most overrated game on all time on it, HALO. Gears is the better game. Microsoft spend billions to make ppl it's sheeple. They barely release anything on the system and ppl still don't wake up, it's like they are in a trance, They say. Next year this is coming or that is coming and when it does it's garbage or dosen't happen. Starfield looks a mess.

As for COD, why should anyone have to buy another console to play a 3RD PARTY GAME. It stinks.

Sony should just do their own FPS.

Orchard459d ago

@BinaryCode
"Nobody in their right mind wants to buy and Xbox"
Tens of millions of people disagree.

"As for COD, why should anyone have to buy another console to play a 3RD PARTY GAME. It stinks."
👀👀 Nobody tell him about the deals Sony makes.

"Sony should just do their own FPS."
They did, they had Killzone, they chose to kill it (no pun intended)

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 459d ago
rlow1459d ago

“Why make games and add to the community when you can spend 10's of billions to take what's already there.”

That same statement can be used on Sony as well. Since this is very specific to Call of Duty. Why can’t Sony make a game to compete against Call of Duty? Why because making deals or buying companies is cheaper in the long run. Hence is why all the big players are buying up companies right now.

Plus Sony has way more ips to draw on than MS. They own a piece of Hollywood with tons of ips they could draw on.

My point is that if you were competing against a big company like Sony. If you had the money to add ips in a relatively short period of time , wouldn’t you do the same?

MrDead459d ago

"That same statement can be used on Sony as well. Since this is very specific to Call of Duty. Why can’t Sony make a game to compete against Call of Duty? Why because making deals or buying companies is cheaper in the long run. Hence is why all the big players are buying up companies right now."

Why would Sony compete against a game that is already on it's system instead of focusing funds on exclusive IP's that generate hardware and sales and build it's user base?

"My point is that if you were competing against a big company like Sony. If you had the money to add ips in a relatively short period of time , wouldn’t you do the same"

MS has been in the industry for over 20 years and is one of the richest corps ever, what been stopping them from making games like Sony and Nintendo?

badz149459d ago

ALAS...Pachter has spoken! Sorry fanboys, the deal won't go through now. It's TRADITION!

LOL

Hofstaderman459d ago

It’s kinda a fact. Whatever Patcher predicts on that is not obvious always goes the opposite way.

Panhandler459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

You act as if Sony hasn't been making these same Acquisitions forever. Hell Sony bought 5 in 2021 and Bungie in 2022 along with 3 others. But your Blind Bias will never act the truth and stop push a narrative that MiCrOsFt is coRrUpt & eViL

badz149458d ago

buying devs =/= buying publishers

ChasterMies458d ago

It’s not just E3 2913 when Microsoft execs said the quiet part out loud. Microsoft put ads on the Xbox home screen. They bundled the Xbox app with every copy of Windows OS. And now they want to buy up all the games and have exclusives to sell Game Pass subscriptions. None of this is for the gamers. Meanwhile, Nintendo and Sony make games that people want to play, and people buy them.

343_Guilty_Spark458d ago

You need to clarify what you mean anti-gamer.

MSFT has developed hardware for the disabled.

They offer an affordable gaming solution in GamePass, which has opened up Gamers to a wealth of titles and smaller developers.

Cloudsaves are not paywalled like PS+ (they are paywalled look it up)

They offer free visual upgrades to older and newer titles.

They still support backwards compatibility.

You can argue about their ability to produce AAA quality games consistently but you need to come with better arguments than "they are anti-gamer".

lelo2play458d ago

If Michael Pachter say's it's going to happen... then it's not going to happen.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 458d ago
Orchard459d ago

The CMA pretty much spells out what is going to happen in their press release:

"Access remedies are a form of behavioural remedy which seek to maintain or
restore competition by enabling competitors to have access on appropriate
terms to the products and facilities of a merger entity that they require to
remain competitive.

Access remedies normally require an access commitment
which is set out in significant detail so that both customers and monitoring
agencies can enforce compliance effectively.

In this case, an access remedy would look to ensure third party access to Activision Blizzard, Inc’s content that is necessary to remedy the provisional SLCs."

bleedsoe9mm459d ago

It's going to end up 100% up to MS if the deal they can negotiate makes the acquisition worth wild to them

Orchard459d ago

Yep, I can see them ultimately agreeing to 'third party access to Activision Blizzard' but trying to negotiate it down to COD only first - and the CMA might accept that.

Eonjay459d ago

It's actually up to the CMA.

IRetrouk459d ago

They actually don't like behaviour remedies, and want structural ones instead.

bleedsoe9mm459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

I think both Minecraft and Bethesda would qualify as structural acquisitions. All depends on if Microsoft can live with it .

IRetrouk459d ago

Not sure that has anything to do with what's being talked about, but, great👍

Orchard459d ago

Their statements appear to suggest otherwise. They suggest behavioral remedies, in fact, they even specifically list what Microsoft would have to do to have a behavioral remedy accepted.

IRetrouk459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

Not sure what you are reading but it's clear behaviour remedies are not very high up on their list of wants, and prefer the other solutions outlined.

https://postimg.cc/yDQsNWTf

https://postimg.cc/4mwT8njJ

Even the European open markets pointed it out

https://www.openmarketsinst...

Orchard459d ago

They specifically state "the CMA will also consider a behavioural access remedy as a possible
remedy"

And then go on to say that that remedy would be: "an access remedy would look to ensure third party access to Activision Blizzard, Inc’s content"

It's clear to anyone that's where this is going, there's no hope in hell of Activision or COD being divested. They lined it up for MS, MS just needs to take the shot.

IRetrouk459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

It literally says they don't like behavioural remedies and it will only look at behavioural on top of structural... they even state the case doesn't have the circumstances that the cma would consider a behavioural as the main remedy, although they will look at them, which they have to.

The only thing that's clear is that this isn't as simple for ms as you and others have led people to believe.

Nobody here knows where this is going, all guess work and wishful thinking on both sides, the cma did their job, nothing more or less.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 459d ago
bleedsoe9mm459d ago

Starting place to negotiate, especially if you know you having a losing case

derek459d ago

@Orchard, this deal ain't going through. All the remedies recommended by the cma were structural. Behavioral remedies were not seen as feasible by the cma with what is before them. But as a courtesy to Microsoft/Activision they are giving them a chance to come up with something before agreeing to divest or officially blocking the acquisition.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 459d ago
XiNatsuDragnel459d ago

The deal won't go through as long as COD, Activision&BlizzardKing in it's current form exist so they will be a split or separation.

darkrider459d ago

This is damage control at full force. From kotick, from Microsoft, from opinions... I suspect that more opinion pieces will appear.

Phlacky459d ago (Edited 459d ago )

Well that's the nail in the coffin then. No way this deals going through. Whatever Michael Pachter says its always the opposite.

Show all comments (59)
100°

Former Dragon Age lead writer David Gaider pours scorn on EA's AI dreams.

"They want you to believe the devs under them are super stoked to work generative AI into their processes," continued Gaider, "but I assure you what they took as excitement was really a veiled wail of despair not unlike the time that team was informed of their new 'really cool' live service mandate.".

LordoftheCritics2d ago

Publishers see gaming as another stock market.

isarai2d ago

I think anyone with some common sense knew this, im glad i don't support their games anymore, what a sh!t company.

Psychonaut851d 15h ago

Friends don’t let friends buy EA or Ubisoft.

Chocoburger1d 15h ago

I said this yesterday. AI isn't what we want when it comes to crafting artistry. Alas, these soulless corporate morons don't care about their work, only about cutting corners as much as possible.

120°

Phil Spencer and the Battle for Xbox’s Soul

Has the rapid growth of Xbox made the ship too heavy? Following the closures of Tango Gameworks, Arkane Austin, and Roundhouse, we explore what the future of Xbox could look like.

LG_Fox_Brazil2d ago

This ship was never meant to sail, this ship was made from the get go to sink as fast as possible. It almost feels that they want to lower the standards of quality in the industry so that they can fit in

rlow11d 18h ago

I disagree, Xbox from the get go innovated and changed the industry. They did a lot of firsts and standardized a lot of others. It wasn’t till the beginning of the Xbox1 era that things started to go south.

Stevonidas1d 14h ago

Yep, although I’d argue it started going to shit when they tried to hock Kinect on their audience instead of continuing to invest in their studios and IPs. 2001-2010 Xbox was peak gaming, though.

rlow11d 13h ago

@Stevonidas
I agree they never should have focused on it after the 360 era. But you do have to remember they were faked out by the huge volumes of Kinects sold. To quote info on Wikipedia, “Project Natal, It was first released on November 4, 2010, and would go on to sell eight million units in its first 60 days of availability.” So if your Xbox and see these huge sales on a peripheral where are you going to put some money? Criticism in hindsight is worthless…..if only we could all see our future. In other wards they had no way of knowing. Plus they had engagement numbers and a lot of signs pointed to people wanting it.

Their biggest mistake wasn’t the Kinect, but unlike Sony after the PS3 debacle. They didn’t double on down on exclusive good games. The other huge mistake was letting Call of Duty go to Sony.

Hedstrom1d 21h ago

Phil wants Xbox to be as soulless as him!

Tacoboto1d 20h ago (Edited 1d 20h ago )

Xbox has no soul and Phil has no confidence, and it's impossible to say either do when they killed Tango and Arkane Austin.

Everything they've said since has only made them look worse to a point that they're actually less competent than Embracer.

Markdn1d 20h ago (Edited 1d 20h ago )

Whe you release something like the series S and expect it not to hurt your business model, and developers have to have parity with games. Then you know Microsoft don't care. Series s is the final nail that broke developers,

Show all comments (12)
360°

Sarah Bond dodges questions on Xbox studio closures

While on stage with Dina Bass at The Bloomberg Technology Summit the President of Xbox, Sarah Bond, was asked about the Xbox studio closures of Arkane Austin, Tango Gameworks, Alpha Dog, and Roundhouse Studios

3d ago
ApocalypseShadow3d ago

Of course she did. She's part of the problem and will just tow the company line.

VenomUK3d ago (Edited 3d ago )

Bloomberg’s Dina Bass could barely read her scripted question without looking at her notes, whilst Sarah Bond who WAS expecting the question spoke without saying anything of substance or answering the question in any meaningful way. Clearly she’s had the same expert PR training as Phil, but this avoidance was disrespectful. In time the short-sighted decision to shut down Tango Gameworks will be seen as of the most notorious examples why Phil Spencer messed up his tenure in charge of Xbox. That’s a fully built out talented team that could’ve been put to work on any project.

Additionally, Phil Spencer should not be using Sarah Bond as a patsy for his mistakes- he should be answering that question.

gleepot2d ago

I think you are all really overselling Tangos value. Hi-Fi rush was a lot of fun. Ghostwire was incredibly dull. Evil within 1 and 2 were just okay.

lucasnooker2d ago

Evil within 2 was incredibly under rated. I thought that game was surprisingly good

NotoriousWhiz2d ago

Someone else said it best. I don't think it was a Phil decision. It was most likely a Satya decision. I think Microsoft is done giving out free money to Xbox.

Cacabunga2d ago

people please boycott Activision Bethesda next release and support Hellblade.
these people mus understand that they cannot treat their fans and employees that way.
scumbags.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2d ago
XiNatsuDragnel3d ago

Yikes you don't help Sarah 😬 making a problem worse

Christopher3d ago

She's playing her role. There's absolutely nothing any of them can say other than the truth, this is about profit margins and not quality, so they just don't answer anything and wait for gamers to forget.

shinoff21832d ago

I think news is coming of more ps5 release but they gotta be careful cause Xbox is still sitting on store shelves. They can't get left holding all that stock

Lightning772d ago

Come next month they'll flash nice looking games in our faces and expecting us to forget.

The only thing that'll be going through my mind at their showcase is how many of those studios will get shut down after release.

I'm not joking around either. MS probably expects every game to be like COD and do COD numbers. What a way to destroy gaming for the entire industry because they're dumb af at being realistic in what success means for each game.

-Foxtrot2d ago

Always feels she was brought in / promoted for this. Happened just before things started to be out in motion.

Phil and co have someone to throw under the bus and share the blame with

zaanan2d ago

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

darthv722d ago

....won't get fooled again

Hofstaderman3d ago

Like a deer caught in the headlights.....

notachance3d ago

I always wondered why xbox had multiple leaders with similar titles like Phil Spencer, Matt Booty, and Sarah Bond, like, how many heads do you actually need?

Seems to me it would be more cost efficient to cut 2 of them instead of all those studios.

DarXyde2d ago

Frankly, I suspect she is the most competent of them. I don't mean that I like her more, I mean that she's the best at articulating herself and giving the talking points MS wants to give. The others are starting to sound more like her than her sounding like any of them.

Are any of these people "responsible" for what's happening? No. This reeks of Nadella. But that being said, I don't see any of the Xbox heads stepping down in protest.

"Don't shoot the messenger", sure, but at the same time, the messengers don't seem to take umbrage with the message. Not enough to remove themselves from it, anyway.

CS72d ago

I disagree. Nadella is looking for profit as a CEO should in my opinion.

The problem is Dr. Phil & Co. had 10 years to bring Xbox back on track and have been failing woefully.

Phil needs to sell to Nadella that if we are to make a profit, we need to make great games. And to do that we need employees here for the long haul and the freedom to work on creative projects.

But as Phil said himself he doesn’t believe great games sell consoles.

RpgSama2d ago

Dude, 100%, forgot Major Nelson and Aaron Greenberg, like what is the point for all these suits? They have more C-level executives than games released in a generation.

This is just so they can all pass along the hot potato one at a time and in between all of them can say a lot without actually saying anything, misinformation at its finest.

Show all comments (46)