Microsoft buys Activision Blizzard

[J1M]

The motivated young people who want a creative job are YouTubers now.

 

[Catacombs]

The motivated young people who want a creative job are YouTubers now.

The creative types go to YouTube. The artistic go to Instagram. The lazy go to OnlyFans.

 

[Black]

We all know where the old schizo types go.

 

[Storyfag]

We all know where the old schizo types go.

 

[ADL]

Game developers around the world are creating innovative and groundbreaking games. We think that we can do more to bring those experiences to the billions of players everywhere. Our announcement in January that we intend to acquire Activision Blizzard was an important milestone in our journey to do so. Since then, regulators, game developers and players have been asking what the acquisition means for the industry and, most importantly, for players.


While we love consoles, we recognize that they are not the only way that people play games. Today, the largest and fastest growing segment of gaming is mobile platforms. To reach the billions of players where they are and no matter what device they play on, we need to embrace choice. Giving players choice in how they play their games makes gaming more accessible and leads to larger, more vibrant communities of players. Choice is equally important to developers. Developers benefit from having a diversity of distribution and business models for their games. Choice unlocks opportunities for innovation and enables the industry to grow.


We are expanding choice in two ways: through the creation of Game Pass, which gives players a subscription option; and by bringing more games to mobile platforms, including through our cloud game streaming technology. Subscription services like Game Pass make gaming more affordable and help players from all over the world find their next favorite game. Game Pass empowers developers to bring more games to more players, not fewer. We intend to make Activision Blizzard’s much-loved library of games – including Overwatch, Diablo and Call of Duty – available in Game Pass and to grow those gaming communities. By delivering even more value to players, we hope to continue growing Game Pass, extending its appeal to mobile phones and any connected device.
https://blogs.microsoft.com/on-the-issues/2022/09/01/gaming-everyone-everywhere/

Sony has some big marketing deal on Call of Duty until 2026 so I'm curious how that'll work. Since they're putting Blizzard's games on GamePass for Xbox and PC, hope that means they'll come to Steam too since they've already made the move for nuModern Warfare 2.

 

[Assisted Living Godzilla]

I think the Sony deal is basically just first dibs on DLC and betas.

 

[Morgoth]

Feds likely to challenge Microsoft’s $69 billion Activision takeover​

A lawsuit would be the FTC’s biggest merger challenge to date under Chair Lina Khan.

Central to the FTC’s concerns is whether acquiring Activision would give Microsoft an unfair boost in the video game market. | David Ramos/Getty Images
By Josh Sisco
11/23/2022 05:30 PM EST
Updated: 11/23/2022 05:44 PM EST

The Federal Trade Commission is likely to file an antitrust lawsuit to block Microsoft’s $69 billion takeover of video game giant Activision Blizzard, maker of the hit games Call of Duty and Candy Crush, according to three people with knowledge of the matter.

A lawsuit would be the FTC’s biggest move yet under Chair Lina Khan to rein in the power of the world’s largest technology companies. It would also be a major black mark for Microsoft, which has positioned itself as a white knight of sorts on antitrust issues in the tech sector after going through its own grueling regulatory antitrust battles around the world more than two decades ago.

A lawsuit challenging the deal is not guaranteed, and the FTC’s four commissioners have yet to vote out a complaint or meet with lawyers for the companies, two of the people said. However, the FTC staff reviewing the deal are skeptical of the companies’ arguments, those people said.

The investigation remains ongoing, but much of the heavy lifting is completed, including depositions of Microsoft chief executive Satya Nadella and Activision head Bobby Kotick, the people with knowledge of the investigation said. If the agency does move ahead with a case, it could come as soon as next month, said the people, all of whom were granted anonymity to discuss a confidential matter.

Central to the FTC’s concerns is whether acquiring Activision would give Microsoft an unfair boost in the video game market. Microsoft’s Xbox is number three to the industry-leading Sony Interactive Entertainment and its PlayStation console. Sony, however, has emerged as the deal’s primary opponent, telling the FTC and regulators in other countries that if Microsoft made hit games like Call of Duty exclusive to its platforms Sony would be significantly disadvantaged.

The FTC declined to comment.

In an October statement to the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority outlining Sony’s position, and published Wednesday, Sony says the deal will not only harm its ability to compete but will also leave consumers with less choice for gaming and developers with less choice for where to publish games. Microsoft is a “Tech Titan buying up irreplaceable content at incontestable prices ($68.7 billion) to tip competition to itself,” Sony said.

In its own statement, also released by the UK regulator on Wednesday, Microsoft accuses Sony of making self-serving statements to maintain its number one position in gaming. “The suggestion that the incumbent market leader, Sony, with clear and enduring market power, could be foreclosed by the smallest of the three console competitors, Xbox, as a result of losing access to one title, is not credible.”

Microsoft said it has repeatedly promised to keep Call of Duty available on Sony’s PlayStation, and furthermore, the game is not the must-have Sony says it is. Additionally, Microsoft notes that the game is not currently available on any subscription service, and adding it to the Xbox service in the future would not harm Sony.

To a lesser extent, Google is also an opponent of the deal, according to two of the people with knowledge of the matter. The company has argued that Microsoft has purposely degraded the quality of its Game Pass subscription service when used with Google’s Chrome operating system, and owning Activision would further its incentive to do so, ultimately steering hardware sales towards Microsoft and away from Google, the people said.

Google is a minor player in the gaming industry and is winding down its own online gaming service Stadia. However, it is under antitrust scrutiny around the world, including for conduct in the gaming market, and is unlikely to be a sympathetic opponent. Fortnite maker Epic Games is currently suing Google, arguing that it is illegally blocking Fortnite from its mobile app store Google Play. As part of that case, Epic recently accused Google of paying Activision $360 million to not offer a competing app store on Android phones.

A Google spokesperson declined to comment.

Microsoft has pledged to continue making Call of Duty available on Sony’s Playstation console, and recently made an offer to give Sony access to the game for the next 10 years. The offer was first reported by the New York Times. It’s not known how Sony responded to the offer and it did not respond for comment on Wednesday.

The FTC’s concerns however extend beyond Call of Duty, and investigators are trying to determine how Microsoft could leverage future, unannounced titles to boost its gaming business, according to two people with knowledge of the review.

“Any suggestion that the transaction could lead to anticomp effects is completely absurd. This merger will benefit gamers and the US gaming industry, especially as we face increasingly stiff competition from abroad,” said Activision spokesperson Joe Christinat. “We are committed to continuing to work cooperatively with regulators around the globe to allow the transaction to proceed, but will not hesitate to fight to defend the transaction if required.”

Activision also disputes Epic’s allegations. ”Epic’s allegations are nonsense,” Christinat said. ”We can confirm that Google never asked us, pressured us, or made us agree not to compete with Google Play — and we’ve already submitted documents and testimony that prove this.”

Microsoft spokesperson David Cuddy said the company “is prepared to address the concerns of regulators, including the FTC, and Sony to ensure the deal closes with confidence. We’ll still trail Sony and Tencent in the market after the deal closes, and together Activision and Xbox will benefit gamers and developers and make the industry more competitive.”

The FTC technically does not have to take any action at this point. Regulators in Europe and the UK have also recently opened in-depth probes, meaning the companies couldn’t close the deal until the Spring at the earliest. That means if the FTC does sue, it would likely bring a case in its own in-house administrative court.

The agency typically challenges deals first in federal court to block them with a temporary injunction pending a trial in its in-house court. Without the imminent risk of the deal closing, however, it would be difficult to get a temporary injunction.

The companies have until July next year to close the deal without renegotiating the agreement. An administrative lawsuit filed later this year or in January would be unlikely to be resolved by July, and could potentially force the companies to abandon the deal.

 

[Atlantico]

I believe it when I see it. The FTC had no problems allowing Disney to buy 20th Century.

They're in both cases buying content, not marketshare. People aren't locked into Activision products. This is clickbait. The deal will go through on the nod.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

US regulators will do nothing to stop US companies from having a better position in the market over foreign competitors you doofus

 

[RaggleFraggle]

Phil Spencer has gone on record saying he wants to make more *Craft RTS games.

There was a time when hearing that would’ve made me happy. Now I dread the sort of incoherent braindead writing we’re likely to get.

 

[deuxhero]

Whatever MS does to Activison, they're not so retarded as to release a game for a revived IP to very good success for its budget with at least two obvious and highly desired sequels that can be made then immediately gut the studio to turn it into a CoD farm.

 

[Caim]

Phil Spencer has gone on record saying he wants to make more *Craft RTS games.

Dunno, a Minecraft RTS could work.

 

[RaggleFraggle]

I checked out an indie rts Purple War. It’s an unimaginative clone of the Blizz *craft games. SC-like mechanics with a cartoon fantasy skin. On the bright side, it’s not an insulting betrayal like Reforged.

The plot of the four missions released so far is a simplistic excuse plot that feels like a placeholder. “The orcs are attacking my people! They burned my hometown! They kidnapped my son!” After almost two decades dealing with braindead Blizz writing, this a breath of fresh air and probably the best I can ask for.

 

[KazikluBey]

There was a time when hearing that would’ve made me happy. Now I dread the sort of incoherent braindead writing we’re likely to get.

Why? Not like it can get worse than Starcraft 2, anyway.

 

[Ismaul]

Feds likely to challenge Microsoft’s $69 billion Activision takeover​

The challenge is justified, they should've made it 69.420 billion. Cheapskates.

 

[RobotSquirrel]

Feds likely to challenge Microsoft’s $69 billion Activision takeover​

The challenge is justified, they should've made it 69.420 billion. Cheapskates.

I challenge you, it should've been 69.420.666 billion on account of Bill Gates being the AntiChrist.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.reuters.com/markets/dea...ions-soon-activision-deal-sources-2022-11-28/

Exclusive: Microsoft likely to offer EU concessions soon in Activision deal -sources​

BRUSSELS, Nov 28 (Reuters) - Microsoft (MSFT.O) is likely to offer remedies to EU antitrust regulators in the coming weeks to stave off formal objections to its $69 billion bid for "Call of Duty" maker Activision Blizzard (ATVI.O), people familiar with the matter said.

The U.S. software giant and Xbox maker announced the deal in January to help it compete better with leaders Tencent (0700.HK) and Sony (6758.T).

It has since then faced regulatory headwinds in the European Union, Britain and in the United States, with Sony criticising the deal and even calling for a regulatory veto.

The deadline for the European Commission, which is investigating the deal, to set out a formal list of competition concerns known as a statement of objection is in January. Offering remedies before such a document is issued could shorten the regulatory process.

"Ultimately, such a move could secure an early clearance with the European Commission and subsequently be used by the parties before other antitrust agencies," said Stephane Dionnet, a partner at law firm McDermott Will & Emery.

"However, it remains to be seen whether the active complainants will validate such concessions (in particular in terms of scope) and if behavioural remedies will also be accepted by the CMA and the FTC," he said, referring to the UK and U.S. antitrust agencies.

Microsoft's remedy would consist mainly of a 10-year licensing deal to Playstation owner Sony, another person with direct knowledge said.

Activision shares were up 2% after the Reuters story was published.

The EU competition watchdog, which is scheduled to decide on the deal by April 11, and Sony declined to comment.

Microsoft said it was working with the Commission to address valid marketplace concerns.

"Sony, as the industry leader, says it is worried about Call of Duty, but we've said we are committed to making the same game available on the same day on both Xbox and PlayStation. We want people to have more access to games, not less," a Microsoft spokesperson said.

The deal has been cleared unconditionally in Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Serbia.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Sony's claims are rather hypocritical considering they bought Bungie just a few months ago, a developer known for creating video games that directly competed with Activision's Call of Duty.

 

[Morgoth]

I hope this deal falls through. This consolidation craze will only further kill gaming as an entertainment form.

 

[fork]

Kill as in beating a dead horse?

 

[Morgoth]

Activision Blizzard appeal against Blizzard Albany QA union vote rejected ​

National Labor Relations Board found no reason to invalidate the vote

News by CJ Wheeler News Reporter

Published on Dec. 2, 2022



An appeal made by Activision Blizzard that blocked Blizzard Albany’s QA staff from unionising has been rejected by the US National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). GIbiz report the publisher tried to argue that the entire staff of Blizzard Albany should vote on the unionisation effort rather than just the development studio’s QA team, but the NLRB disagree.

The appeal was rejected on November 30th, as the NLRB found Activision Blizzard had raised “no substantial issues warranting review”. The NLRB’s decision read: “The testers have a separate department and separate supervision; perform a distinct function, utilizing distinct skills; and have notably lower wages than the excluded employees." They also noted that the QA team are part of “an administrative hierarchy that is completely separate” from employees excluded from the unionisation vote. You can read the full decision, along with other documents relating to the unionisation vote, here.

An Activision Blizzard spokesperson told GIbiz: "We still believe our entire Albany team should have the right to vote. This is about fundamental fairness for every member of the team, given the close, collaborative way that Blizzard Albany operates, and ensuring that every employee has the right to choose."

This is Activision Blizzard's second attempt to thwart the QA testers’ vote, as they made an earlier attempt back in October, which was also turned away by the NLRB. Activision Blizzard made similar moves to block a vote by Raven Software’s QA staff earlier this year. The publisher initially rejected their staff’s request to unionise, who then approached the National Labor Relations Board to become involved. The appeal against Raven QA staff efforts was also denied by the NLRB. Raven’s QA team later voted to unionise by a vast majority, becoming the first notable such union at a US-based studio.

 

[Caim]

Reminder that Raven made games like Heretic, Hexen, Dark Forces III and IV, Wolfenstein 2009, Singularity and Quake 4. They don't deserve being the QA slaves of Activision.

 

[Mikeal]

But people who made these games are still working at Raven?

 

[†††]

But people who made these games are still working at Raven?

There's no a single developer group with recognizable personnel from 15 years ago.

 

[Caim]

But people who made these games are still working at Raven?

There's no a single developer group with recognizable personnel from 15 years ago.

Maybe the team behind Grimoire?