4 ms·

EU antitrust regulators clear $69B Microsoft, Activision deal

40 points by alphabetting 3y ago

nerdypirate 3y ago
What happens now? The acquisition was banned in the UK
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- PretzelPirate 3y ago
  Microsoft is fighting the CMA and hired a big-name lawyer who is supposedly good at it.
  - blibble 3y ago
    the only way you can fight a CMA ruling is to show a procedural error and given they knew who they'd be going up against, I suspect they were fastidious
    - Hamuko 3y ago
      And as far as I've understood it, winning an appeal against the CMA just means that the CMA has to process the merger again. CMA ruled that Facebook had to divest Giphy, it was appealed, sent back to CMA and CMA still ruled that Facebook had to divest.
- reaperman 3y ago
  I suppose they could just not operate in the UK, but that seems unlikely.
- TheLoafOfBread 3y ago
  I guess we will see what Global Britain actually means.
ramesh31 3y ago
I wish this would go through. Activision as a seperate entity is doing absolutely nothing to promote competition in the space. It reminds me a lot of the Sprint/T-Mobile merger. This would be nothing but good news for gamers.
- belter 3y ago
  How going into the hands of the evil empire is good for gamers?
- lttlrck 3y ago
  When has consolidation in a market ever increased competition? Activision is already huge so maybe that's their problem.
Hamuko 3y ago
>Such licenses are "practical and effective" Effective for 10 years, to be precise. What then? There's been exactly zero ZeniMax games announced for rivalling consoles after the Microsoft buyout in 2021 despite Microsoft telling the European regulators that it wasn't in their interest to withold games from other platforms. Hi-Fi Rush is exclusive, Redfall is exclusive and the PS5 version was scrapped, and Starfield is exclusive.
VWWHFSfQ 3y ago
USA and UK have already moved to block the acquisition. And now EU is the one allowing it to go through? > The approval is a rare occasion where European regulators appear to be more accommodating to the tech industry than the United States. This is very surprising to me. In any case, unless FTC loses their lawsuit, which I believe is unlikely, the merger is still most assuredly not going to happen.
- lttlrck 3y ago
  Given the chances if it going through are quite limited, perhaps they're playing the odds and this is a purely political decision. Sending some signal to US/UK/MS that we're not party to. Plus if it somehow goes through they'll have a big US target to fine if they step out of line. I'm sure they'll like that.
badwolf 3y ago
Good. Just let it happen already.
nologic01 3y ago
Can somebody more informed comment on how/why the UK / EU regulators thought differently about this. One would think that regulators have protocols (like, say, a medical doctor) and while of-course there can be "light-touch" or "strict" regulation and differences of opinion, that would be the exception. In any case usually it is the EU that is accused of "regulatory overreach".
- belter 3y ago
  5,000,000€ difference... - https://www.lobbyfacts.eu/datacard/microsoft-corporation?rid=0801162959-21 https://www.lobbyfacts.eu/datacard/microsoft-corporation?rid...
  - rvz 3y ago
    There you have it. The EU donkeys falling for the carrot on the stick and unbeknownst to them, they have approved a horizontally integrated merger that is a bad deal for gamers and competition. The EU has done may silly decisions like their recent AI act legislation, but this one is their biggest error yet which they have failed to stop the further consolidation of large existing multi-billion dollar games companies. The EU is know to give in to bribes so easily and €5M in bribes is just beyond pathetic to approve this.
    - tgmatt 3y ago
      I'm curious as to why you think it's a bad deal for gamers and competition, given the disdain pretty much every gamer with experience has with Activision. Microsoft seems, at least outwardly, to care about their gaming division and their games have a whole lot less predatory microtransactions compared to anything that has come out of Activision in the last x years.
  - belter 3y ago
    Microsoft has Seven! lobbyists with European Parliament accreditation. It must get busy in those coffee breaks. If you know the layout of the building in Brussels, you might know you can't go to the the toilet in peace without bumping into a Microsoft lobbyist :-)
bheadmaster 3y ago
I can't wait for the next big AAA title with DRM, subscription, dozens of DLC (without which, of course, the game sucks), and a ton of microtransactions for the real pay-to-win experience! What's the point of being rich if you can't use your money to buy superiority over other players?
- reaperman 3y ago
  I can't wait for StarCraft 3. But also, I want to point out that I think StarCraft 2 set a really wonderful model for $$$ DLC: - Nothing that affected gameplay was DLC - DLC was restricted to additional solo/co-op campaigns and cosmetic skins. - The only thing I would change is there was a button to override player-chosen "colors" and set yourself/friendlies to bright green and enemies to bright red for consistency game-to-game. I'd like that button to also set skins to default.
  - pixelpoet 3y ago
    Username checks out :)
- doublepg23 3y ago
  Is this happening? Even most of the AAA games that were recently lauded today are pretty consumer friendly experiences (Elden Ring, Zelda, God of War). It seems like a great time to be a gamer.
ralfn 3y ago
I see a lot of negative energy here. I'm not a fan of Microsoft by any stretch, but i do want to play devil's' advocate here. 1. Cloud gaming currently represents a neglectable portion of the market. Clearly it needs a very large player to even attempt to make it work. 2. Gaming as a Netflix/HBO/Disney+ style subscription is not a crazy idea. It requires at least one party to get some critical mass and prove the market actually exists, and then competition will appear who were initially more risk averse. The streaming wars of video content definitely improved the market for consumers compared to risk-free hollywood blockbusters and cheap reality TV that came before it. 3. All-you-can-eat gaming as a subscription might actually increase the diversity and quality of games. Games are currently so expensive to produce that very few risks are taken. This allows much more space for niche games that have a small loyal following. 4. The assumption that Microsoft would use XBox live as a lock-in to sell you a subsidized console seems absolutely silly. This is more about them finding an exit to just discontinue the XBox console all together. You can already play XBox live games on a Steamdeck or an Android TV. 5. The gaming world is much more volatile than people seem to understand. Activision's dominance is only sustainable if they keep making games that are more compelling and just like is the case for Ubisoft or EA who are having a really bad decade, that seems to require more than just money and banking on the past. It's a fiercely competitive industry and the actual lead actors (i.e. the hero developers) jump ship or start a new developer company every other day. So all they end up buying is IP and managers. The rest would cost just as much to keep as they would to steal. I understand people might not like Microsoft to be the one taking the initiative here, but is the initiative itself really that bad for consumers or the developers? Because i'm one of those people who would appreciate the change in the market. I spend more money on streaming services where i also give more things a try, than i ever would if i would be buying or renting music/tv-shows/movies. I spent more _and_ get more value. Why is the same notion for gaming somehow worse for everyone?
- paulryanrogers 3y ago
  > All-you-can-eat gaming as a subscription might actually increase the diversity and quality of games. I'm curious how that could work. Because if it's a subscription then how do they pay back the creators? Is some portion based on play time? If so I can see that actually funneling more money up to the well known games and less to indies.
nozzlegear 3y ago
Mixed feelings on this as someone that’s been playing World of Warcraft every day for the last 12 years. Blizzard could definitely use a shakeup and better management, but Dragonflight has been such a huge improvement over their last two expansions that it seems like such a shakeup has already happened. I’m wary of anything good they have going right now being upset again. On top of that, I play World of Warcraft on macOS where it runs flawlessly. I understand that new games are likely only going to support Windows in the PC market, and indeed that’s been the case for Blizzard games for many years. But my biggest fear with a Microsoft merger is that macOS support for WoW will be dropped at some point.
- calf 3y ago
  I wonder if the regulators didn't argue that Microsoft having Blizzard games would indeed pose problems for Apple hardware.
lofaszvanitt 3y ago
Stealing and expropriation of other people's intellectual property will not go unpunished...

40 points by alphabetting 3y ago

nerdypirate 3y ago

What happens now? The acquisition was banned in the UK

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
PretzelPirate 3y ago
Microsoft is fighting the CMA and hired a big-name lawyer who is supposedly good at it.
- blibble 3y ago
  the only way you can fight a CMA ruling is to show a procedural error and given they knew who they'd be going up against, I suspect they were fastidious
  - Hamuko 3y ago
    And as far as I've understood it, winning an appeal against the CMA just means that the CMA has to process the merger again. CMA ruled that Facebook had to divest Giphy, it was appealed, sent back to CMA and CMA still ruled that Facebook had to divest.
reaperman 3y ago
I suppose they could just not operate in the UK, but that seems unlikely.
TheLoafOfBread 3y ago
I guess we will see what Global Britain actually means.

ramesh31 3y ago

I wish this would go through. Activision as a seperate entity is doing absolutely nothing to promote competition in the space. It reminds me a lot of the Sprint/T-Mobile merger. This would be nothing but good news for gamers.

belter 3y ago
How going into the hands of the evil empire is good for gamers?
lttlrck 3y ago
When has consolidation in a market ever increased competition? Activision is already huge so maybe that's their problem.

Hamuko 3y ago

>Such licenses are "practical and effective" Effective for 10 years, to be precise. What then? There's been exactly zero ZeniMax games announced for rivalling consoles after the Microsoft buyout in 2021 despite Microsoft telling the European regulators that it wasn't in their interest to withold games from other platforms. Hi-Fi Rush is exclusive, Redfall is exclusive and the PS5 version was scrapped, and Starfield is exclusive.

VWWHFSfQ 3y ago

USA and UK have already moved to block the acquisition. And now EU is the one allowing it to go through? > The approval is a rare occasion where European regulators appear to be more accommodating to the tech industry than the United States. This is very surprising to me. In any case, unless FTC loses their lawsuit, which I believe is unlikely, the merger is still most assuredly not going to happen.

lttlrck 3y ago
Given the chances if it going through are quite limited, perhaps they're playing the odds and this is a purely political decision. Sending some signal to US/UK/MS that we're not party to. Plus if it somehow goes through they'll have a big US target to fine if they step out of line. I'm sure they'll like that.

badwolf 3y ago

Good. Just let it happen already.

nologic01 3y ago

Can somebody more informed comment on how/why the UK / EU regulators thought differently about this. One would think that regulators have protocols (like, say, a medical doctor) and while of-course there can be "light-touch" or "strict" regulation and differences of opinion, that would be the exception. In any case usually it is the EU that is accused of "regulatory overreach".

belter 3y ago
5,000,000€ difference... - https://www.lobbyfacts.eu/datacard/microsoft-corporation?rid=0801162959-21 https://www.lobbyfacts.eu/datacard/microsoft-corporation?rid...
- rvz 3y ago
  There you have it. The EU donkeys falling for the carrot on the stick and unbeknownst to them, they have approved a horizontally integrated merger that is a bad deal for gamers and competition. The EU has done may silly decisions like their recent AI act legislation, but this one is their biggest error yet which they have failed to stop the further consolidation of large existing multi-billion dollar games companies. The EU is know to give in to bribes so easily and €5M in bribes is just beyond pathetic to approve this.
  - tgmatt 3y ago
    I'm curious as to why you think it's a bad deal for gamers and competition, given the disdain pretty much every gamer with experience has with Activision. Microsoft seems, at least outwardly, to care about their gaming division and their games have a whole lot less predatory microtransactions compared to anything that has come out of Activision in the last x years.
- belter 3y ago
  Microsoft has Seven! lobbyists with European Parliament accreditation. It must get busy in those coffee breaks. If you know the layout of the building in Brussels, you might know you can't go to the the toilet in peace without bumping into a Microsoft lobbyist :-)

bheadmaster 3y ago

I can't wait for the next big AAA title with DRM, subscription, dozens of DLC (without which, of course, the game sucks), and a ton of microtransactions for the real pay-to-win experience! What's the point of being rich if you can't use your money to buy superiority over other players?

reaperman 3y ago
I can't wait for StarCraft 3. But also, I want to point out that I think StarCraft 2 set a really wonderful model for $$$ DLC: - Nothing that affected gameplay was DLC - DLC was restricted to additional solo/co-op campaigns and cosmetic skins. - The only thing I would change is there was a button to override player-chosen "colors" and set yourself/friendlies to bright green and enemies to bright red for consistency game-to-game. I'd like that button to also set skins to default.
- pixelpoet 3y ago
  Username checks out :)
doublepg23 3y ago
Is this happening? Even most of the AAA games that were recently lauded today are pretty consumer friendly experiences (Elden Ring, Zelda, God of War). It seems like a great time to be a gamer.

ralfn 3y ago

I see a lot of negative energy here. I'm not a fan of Microsoft by any stretch, but i do want to play devil's' advocate here. 1. Cloud gaming currently represents a neglectable portion of the market. Clearly it needs a very large player to even attempt to make it work. 2. Gaming as a Netflix/HBO/Disney+ style subscription is not a crazy idea. It requires at least one party to get some critical mass and prove the market actually exists, and then competition will appear who were initially more risk averse. The streaming wars of video content definitely improved the market for consumers compared to risk-free hollywood blockbusters and cheap reality TV that came before it. 3. All-you-can-eat gaming as a subscription might actually increase the diversity and quality of games. Games are currently so expensive to produce that very few risks are taken. This allows much more space for niche games that have a small loyal following. 4. The assumption that Microsoft would use XBox live as a lock-in to sell you a subsidized console seems absolutely silly. This is more about them finding an exit to just discontinue the XBox console all together. You can already play XBox live games on a Steamdeck or an Android TV. 5. The gaming world is much more volatile than people seem to understand. Activision's dominance is only sustainable if they keep making games that are more compelling and just like is the case for Ubisoft or EA who are having a really bad decade, that seems to require more than just money and banking on the past. It's a fiercely competitive industry and the actual lead actors (i.e. the hero developers) jump ship or start a new developer company every other day. So all they end up buying is IP and managers. The rest would cost just as much to keep as they would to steal. I understand people might not like Microsoft to be the one taking the initiative here, but is the initiative itself really that bad for consumers or the developers? Because i'm one of those people who would appreciate the change in the market. I spend more money on streaming services where i also give more things a try, than i ever would if i would be buying or renting music/tv-shows/movies. I spent more _and_ get more value. Why is the same notion for gaming somehow worse for everyone?

paulryanrogers 3y ago
> All-you-can-eat gaming as a subscription might actually increase the diversity and quality of games. I'm curious how that could work. Because if it's a subscription then how do they pay back the creators? Is some portion based on play time? If so I can see that actually funneling more money up to the well known games and less to indies.

nozzlegear 3y ago

Mixed feelings on this as someone that’s been playing World of Warcraft every day for the last 12 years. Blizzard could definitely use a shakeup and better management, but Dragonflight has been such a huge improvement over their last two expansions that it seems like such a shakeup has already happened. I’m wary of anything good they have going right now being upset again. On top of that, I play World of Warcraft on macOS where it runs flawlessly. I understand that new games are likely only going to support Windows in the PC market, and indeed that’s been the case for Blizzard games for many years. But my biggest fear with a Microsoft merger is that macOS support for WoW will be dropped at some point.

calf 3y ago
I wonder if the regulators didn't argue that Microsoft having Blizzard games would indeed pose problems for Apple hardware.

lofaszvanitt 3y ago

Stealing and expropriation of other people's intellectual property will not go unpunished...