Microsoft buys Activision Blizzard

[Caim]

Deathloop - Bethesda's most profitable game ever: https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/23/...a-acquisition-starfield-playstation-exclusive

Microsoft acquired Bethesda after hearing Starfield would be exclusive to PlayStation​

Microsoft saw Sony paying Bethesda to keep games off Xbox and decided to do something drastic about it.​

Microsoft’s Xbox chief has revealed one of the key reasons behind the acquisition of Bethesda parent company ZeniMax: potential Starfield PlayStation exclusivity. Speaking at the FTC v. Microsoft hearing today, Phil Spencer revealed that Sony regularly pays competitors to “skip our platform” and Microsoft felt it needed to own Bethesda to compete.

“When we acquired ZeniMax one of the impetus for that is that Sony had done a deal for Deathloop and Ghostwire... to pay Bethesda to not ship those games on Xbox,” said Spencer. “So the discussion about Starfield when we heard that Starfield was potentially also going to end up skipping Xbox, we can’t be in a position as a third-place console where we fall further behind on our content ownership so we’ve had to secure content to remain viable in the business.”

Microsoft spent $7.5 billion to acquire ZeniMax Media, the parent company of Elder Scrolls and Fallout studio Bethesda Softworks. At the close of the deal, Microsoft promised Xbox and PC exclusives and it has so far shipped Redfall with Starfield set for a September 6th debut. Bethesda’s upcoming Indiana Jones game is also an exclusive for Xbox and PC.

Later in his testimony, Spencer refused to confirm whether Elder Scrolls VI is an Xbox exclusive or not. “I think we’ve been a little unclear on what platforms it’s launching on, given how far out the game is,” said Spencer. “It’s difficult for us right now to nail down.” Spencer did previously hint that Elder Scrolls VI would be an Xbox exclusive, but the game is still years away.

A big part of Spencer’s testimony today has been around painting Sony as an aggressive and hostile competitor. “Every time we ship a game on PlayStation... Sony captures 30 percent of the revenue that we do on their platform and then they use that money among other revenue that they have to do things to try to reduce Xbox’s survival on the market,” said Spencer. “We try to compete, but as I said, over the last 20 years we’ve failed to do that effectively.”

Buying up Bethesda and trying to acquire Activision Blizzard is, Spencer argues, a way to compete with Sony. Microsoft sure is spending a lot of cash to compete here, though. The proposed Activision Blizzard deal is valued at $68.7 billion.

 

[cruel]

They should just buy Ubisoft instead. A match made in heaven.

Sent from my KB2005 using Tapatalk

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/26/23774547/microsoft-sony-xbox-internal-emails-ftc-out-of-business

Microsoft exec was ready to ‘go spend Sony out of business’ to strengthen Xbox​

Internal email shows Microsoft’s early thinking on acquisitions to drive Xbox Game Pass growth.​

Microsoft’s Xbox Game Studios chief, Matt Booty, was encouraging Xbox CFO Tim Stuart to spend big money on acquiring game content in 2019 to set the company up to battle Sony in subscriptions. The revelation comes in an email thread that’s part of the FTC v. Microsoft hearing.

“We (Microsoft) are in a very unique position to be able to go spend Sony out of business,” said Booty in a December 2019 email, referencing spending $2 billion or $3 billion in 2020 to avoid competitors getting ahead in content at a later date.
“It is practically impossible for anyone to start a new video streaming service at scale at this point,” said Booty, referencing competitors like Google, Amazon, and Sony. Booty described content as a moat and that only Sony could really compete with Xbox Game Pass:

In games, Google is 3 to 4 years away from being able to have a studio up and running. Amazon has shown no ability to execute on game content. Content is the one moat that we have, in terms of a catalog that runs on current devices and capability to create new. Sony is really the only other player who could compete with Game Pass and we have a 2 year and 10 million subs lead.

Microsoft argues the email is old and that it never pursued such a strategy anyway. “This email is three and a half years old and predates the announcement of our acquisition by 25 months,” says David Cuddy, general manager of public affairs at Microsoft, in a statement to The Verge. “It refers to industry trends we never pursued and is unrelated to the acquisition.” The internal exchange was also sealed as part of a separate so-called “gamers lawsuit” recently.

The email is part of a thread discussing Xbox Game Pass, with the rest of the chain redacted. But it looks like Microsoft was considering reversing the idea of day and date releases of its own games on Xbox Game Pass in 2019 — something Booty wasn’t happy about. “If we reverse course on day and date, it’s going to be hard to convince folks that things like Mixer or xCloud have much of a chance of surviving scrutiny either,” he said.

The 2019 email from Matt Booty. Image: Microsoft

The email shows Microsoft’s strategy and thinking around game content for its Xbox Game Pass subscription in 2019. Microsoft has since acquired Bethesda for $7.5 billion and is trying to get its $68.7 billion proposed Activision Blizzard deal over the line. Both are a lot bigger than the $2-3 billion figure Booty floated in 2019.

Microsoft also seriously considered acquiring Sega and Bungie, with Xbox chief Phil Spencer even going as far as requesting strategy approval from Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella to approach Sega Sammy regarding a potential acquisition of its Sega gaming studios. Both the Sega and Bungie targets were part of a larger watchlist that Microsoft had put together to acquire key studios and mobile developers to bolster Xbox Game Pass.

Update, June 26th 18:15PM ET: Article updated with comment from Microsoft.

 

[whydoibother]

https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/26/23774547/microsoft-sony-xbox-internal-emails-ftc-out-of-business

Microsoft exec was ready to ‘go spend Sony out of business’ to strengthen Xbox​

Isn't this admitting to a crime?

 

[Grauken]

https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/26/23774547/microsoft-sony-xbox-internal-emails-ftc-out-of-business

Microsoft exec was ready to ‘go spend Sony out of business’ to strengthen Xbox​

Isn't this admitting to a crime?

Sure, but I doubt Sony would go after Microsoft for this, too much trouble to be worth it

 

[Infinitron]

It's not a crime, but it could work against them in the antitrust suit against the Activision-Blizzard merger.

 

[Grauken]

It's not a crime

Depends on what they do with "outspending"

 

[Assisted Living Godzilla]

Microsoft buying Activision Blizzard can’t even compare to the Disney Fox deal. There were essentially only six major movie studios in the whole world and one of them bought out the other...which also included major television deals throughout the world, and Disney taking control of Hulu.

Activision Blizzard, while big, produce barely anything in a single year now. If anything, Microsoft buying them will likely see Activision returning to being a company that makes more than just one Call of Duty game in a year.

As much as Microsoft is buying them for CoD and the three games Blizzard make, (although Overwatch certainly took during this buyout period) they’re probably also after all those studios they own too so they can have people making more stuff to flesh out their Xbox Game Pass. I kind of doubt Phil Spencer wearing that Hexen shirt (a series owned by them through the Bethesda buyout made by a studio they’ll get with the Activision buyout) recently was just a coincidence.

 

[toughasnails]

I kind of doubt Phil Spencer wearing that Hexen shirt (a series owned by them through the Bethesda buyout made by a studio they’ll get with the Activision buyout) recently was just a coincidence.

Likewise. But I really wonder what they'd do with Hexen name, given how long dormant the series was and how comparatively obscure it is at this point. If I had to guess, either they'll use it for some sort of souls-like - MS doesn't have their own exclusive in that genre - or they might ne another attempt at a co-op, game-as-a-service title (different playable characters from the old games would now be "revived" as co-op classes).

 

[Assisted Living Godzilla]

I’d guess they just let Raven Software do whatever with a new Hexen and sell it as the return of Raven Software and the Hexen series.

There’s different ways they could go with it, but it probably playing something like their Jedi Knight games but Hexen seems like a save bet. They still got leads from those days working at Raven doing CoD stuff.

 

[Jaedar]

I’d guess they just let Raven Software do whatever with a new Hexen and sell it as the return of Raven Software and the Hexen series.

This seems fabulously optimistic. I doubt anyone talented is still working at ravensoft anyway when they've just been making 2nd tier CoD content for the last decade.

 

[Morgoth]

Did Bobby just stab Phil in the back?

 

[Assisted Living Godzilla]

I’d guess they just let Raven Software do whatever with a new Hexen and sell it as the return of Raven Software and the Hexen series.

This seems fabulously optimistic. I doubt anyone talented is still working at ravensoft anyway when they've just been making 2nd tier CoD content for the last decade.

Go over to MobyGames and look at the credits for Raven Software’s old games. They’ve still got Project Leads, Creative Directors, Lead Programmers, Lead Designers, Lead Artists, and Designers from Soldier of Fortune II: Double Helix, Jedi Academy, Quake 4, and Marvel: Ultimate Alliance. They’ve still got people from later stuff too like that Wolverine game, but the credits for those last three games before they went into CoD mode are a fucking mess.

Unless something happens between now and Microsoft actually getting Activision, if Microsoft wishes, they could have Raven Software do a new Hexen and that Hexen game could still be staffed by many of the leads and designers that were making those Raven Software games from the ‘90s and 2000s that people love.

 

[Assisted Living Godzilla]

Did Bobby just stab Phil in the back?

That person’s interpretation seems intentionally moronic.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.ign.com/articles/sony-b...ed-on-the-xbox-merger-and-other-key-takeaways

Sony Boss Jim Ryan Reveals Why He Turned on the Xbox Merger and Other Key Takeaways​

Ryan called Game Pass "value destructive", gave his opinion on Starfield exclusivity, and more.​

PlayStation boss Jim Ryan appeared in a prerecorded video deposition as part of today's Xbox FTC trial, finally sharing his piece on Microsoft's proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard. In the 70-minute prerecorded segment, Ryan called Game Pass "value destructive", admitted that Starfield's exclusivity is not anti-competitive, and said that an email from Phil Spencer last August "set the alarm bells ringing" at Sony. Here's all the important points from Ryan's appearance today.

Jim Ryan Admits Starfield's Exclusivity Is Not Anti-Competitive​

Lawyers asked Ryan point-blank if he believes exclusivity for games like Redfall and Starfield is anticompetitive.

“I don’t like it but I don’t view it as anticompetitive,” Ryan said of Starfield's Xbox exclusivity.

However, speaking of the Activision Blizzard deal as a whole, Ryan said he told Activision CEO Bobby Kotick he thought the deal was anticompetitive, and wanted it to get blocked.

Ryan Calls Xbox Game Pass 'Value Destructive'​

Ryan called Xbox's subscription service "destructive", saying publishers he's spoken to are not fans of the model.

“The Game Pass business model appears to have some challenges, and Microsoft appears to be losing a lot of money on it,” Ryan said. “I talked to all the publishers and they unanimously do not like Game Pass because it is value destructive."

Ryan added that Sony has never asked Activision to add new versions of Call of Duty into its PlayStation Plus subscription service.

"We knew that Bobby [Kotick] had been very public and very vocal that he did not see that as a route he wanted to take Activision Blizzard down.”

Ryan confirmed that Sony never even floated the possibility by Kotick because they knew he would never even consider it.

IGN has reached out to Xbox for comment on Ryan's statements about Game Pass.

An August 2022 Email from Phil Spencer 'Set the Alarm Bells Ringing' at Sony​

After Xbox announced its intention to acquire Activision in early 2022, Ryan said Xbox boss Phil Spencer reached out to him in May 2022 with a potential letter agreement and list of games Xbox would commit to keeping on PlayStation. Ryan said this interaction with Spencer did not adequately address his concerns about Activision games on PlayStation moving forward.

Ryan said he wasn't that concerned about the transaction in May 2022, but Spencer's response to Sony's counterproposal in August 2022 "set the alarm bells ringing". This email from Spencer caused major concern within Sony's camp, but the contents of the email were not shared today in court.

A major concern for Sony is that Xbox will put Call of Duty on Game Pass, de-incentivizing players to access the title on PlayStation.

“We believe that Microsoft intends to use Call of Duty to disadvantage PlayStation in terms of the availability or the manner in which the game is made available on PlayStation consoles, and to drive PlayStation gamers to the Xbox platforms, specifically Game Pass.”

Ryan Expected Redfall and Starfield on PlayStation Prior to ZeniMax Acquisition​

Console exclusivity of Bethesda games like Starfield, Redfall, and The Elder Scrolls VI has been a hot topic throughout this trial, and the matter came up again during Ryan's deposition. Prior to Microsoft's acquisition of Bethesda, Ryan said he expected Starfield and Redfall to be available on PlayStation because, “pretty much every other Bethesda game had been multiplatform prior to the acquisition”.

Of course, some major exceptions to that are Deathloop and Ghostwire: Tokyo, which launched first as PlayStation console exclusives. Ryan said PlayStation learned after the ZeniMax acquisition that it would miss out on Starfield.

Ryan Said Activision Acquisition Is Not an Exclusivity Play​

In an email exchange between Ryan and former PlayStation boss Chris Deering, Ryan discussed his take on Microsoft's proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard. As we've seen previously, Ryan initially said he believed it was not a play for Xbox exclusivity, but rather for King's suite of mobile titles.

When asked if Microsoft will stop supplying Activision games to PlayStation, Ryan said, “I honestly believe that will not happen.”

Sony Won't Give Dev Kits to Activision If Acquisition Goes Through​

Last week, Xbox boss Phil Spencer testified that Sony sent PlayStation 5 developer kits to Microsoft well after other developers got them. Spencer claimed that the late access to dev kits is why there is no native version of Minecraft on PS5.

Now, Ryan has said his piece on dev kits, saying Sony would hold back dev kits of future consoles from Activision if Xbox's acquisition is completed.

“We simply could not run the risk of a company that was owned by our direct competitor having access to that information,” Ryan said. “That information could leak into other parts of Microsoft and potentially allow them to be able to develop similar features to the ones that we would argue that we invented.”

Ryan claimed Sony could not rely on a contract to make Activision keep PlayStation features secret from Microsoft.

Jim Ryan Says Bungie Will Give Sony 'Way More' Than Activision Would​

Sony acquired Bungie shortly after Microsoft announced the Activision deal last year, and Ryan claimed Sony will get more out of the Bungie purchase than it would out of buying Activision Blizzard. Ryan said this largely comes down to Bungie's expertise in the live service space.

“When you look at $69 billion for Activision compared to $3.6 billion for Bungie, we believe that Bungie can give us way more than a $69 billion acquisition of Activision. And that’s before considering the relative value of that particular transaction.”

Ryan Is Non-Committal About Future Impact of Cloud Gaming​

Cloud gaming has been another big topic during this trial, and Ryan was very non-committal when asked about the timeline of cloud gaming's relevancy.

“Cloud technology will become a meaningful component of how gamers access games between 2025 and 2035,” Ryan said. He wouldn't give a more specific window than that, saying no one can accurately project when cloud gaming will play a larger role in the industry.

Ryan Says Nintendo Is Not Sony's Direct Competitor​

The FTC has been trying to establish that Nintendo is not a competitor in the "relevant market" in terms of this trial, saying that the Nintendo Switch's less capable hardware puts it in a different realm than PlayStation and Xbox. Ryan largely played into this point, claiming Nintendo is in the console market but is not Sony's direct competitor.

Ryan was also asked why he thinks Call of Duty didn't perform well on Nintendo consoles, and he said Call of Duty is aimed at a "very different audience than the standard Nintendo audience that enjoys Mario and Zelda, not Call of Duty.”

Sony Believes Demand for the Xbox Series X|S Has Been Strong​

Ryan was asked how he thought Microsoft's Xbox Series X and S consoles have performed since launch, and he said he believes they performed well.

“I believe that demand for the Xbox Series X and S is strong," Ryan said, "Like [PlayStation], they have been troubled by supply shortages as we understand, but demand for their products is robust in the United States.”

Ryan confirmed that the Xbox brand is typically more popular in the United States compared to other territories, and chose to single out shooters as a major reason why.

“The majority of their games, many of their games, involve an element of shooting. And many of their games involve elements of online multiplayer, both of which typically are more popular in the U.S. than they are outside of the U.S.”

For more on the Xbox FTC trial, check out our analysis of day one and day two, and read our full recap so far.

https://www.eurogamer.net/microsoft-considered-square-enix-buyout-court-documents-reveal

Microsoft considered Square Enix buyout, court documents reveal​

Phil's final fantasy.

Microsoft considered launching a bid to buy Final Fantasy maker Square Enix, freshly-uncovered court documents have revealed.

The idea was floated among Xbox top brass back in 2019 - before Square Enix sold its suite of Western studios, and before Microsoft got entangled in its current attempted $68.7bn Activision Blizzard buyout.

Documents showing Microsoft's interest in acquiring Square Enix surfaced today, as the company continues to plead its case with the Federal Trade Commission.

Dubbed as "Project Phoenix", the idea for Microsoft to buy Square Enix was based around the lure of owning the publisher's three main franchises - Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest and Kingdom Hearts - to gain a bigger Xbox audience in Japan, and a publisher which released games on mobile.

As with its subsequent acquisition of Elder Scrolls publisher Bethesda, Microsoft planned to continue releasing Square Enix's then-announced games across "all relevant platforms", with "all future Square Enix releases" also launched into Xbox Game Pass on a day and date basis.

Future Square Enix games would also "preference Project Scarlett", Microsoft wrote, referencing the development codename for Xbox Series X/S. Microsoft accepted that doing so would "cannibalise" some sales.

Details of Microsoft's buyout attempt are interesting, but perhaps not too surprising considering the news earlier this week that Microsoft has previously also mulled purchases of Sega and Destiny developer Bungie, among numerous others.

Indeed, a merger review watchlist from 2021 highlighted potential candidates such as Hitman studio IO Interactive, Pokémon Go maker Niantic, Hades developer Supergiant Games and more.

In the years since 2019, Square Enix has - if anything - cosied up closer to PlayStation, with console exclusives such as the recently-launched Final Fantasy 16, and the upcoming PlayStation exclusive Foamstars.

Back in 2019, Xbox Game Studios boss Matt Booty said Microsoft should "spend Sony out of business", in another document revealed this week.

Microsoft's history with acquiring studios (or being interested in doing so) is in the spotlight this week as the FTC considers the impact of Xbox owning Call of Duty maker Activision.

The decision to make Bethesda games like Redfall and Starfield Xbox exclusives is "powerful evidence" against the Activision Blizzard takeover being approved, the FTC has said.

The trial continues.

https://www.eurogamer.net/newly-rev...otiations-over-activisions-playstation-future

Newly revealed emails shed light on Microsoft, Sony negotiations over Activision's PlayStation future​

PlayStation boss wanted Bethesda games included in deal.

As part of Microsoft's court battle with US antitrust agency the Federal Trade Commission, emails between Xbox boss Phil Spencer and PlayStation head Jim Ryan have been revealed, outlining Microsoft's initial proposal to Sony - regarding the Activision Blizzard games it would be willing to keep on the PlayStation platform should its $69bn acquisition be approved - and Ryan's lengthy counter-proposal.

As confirmed by Phil Spencer last September, Microsoft contacted Sony shortly after the January announcement of its proposed Activision Blizzard acquisition, providing a signed agreement to Sony guaranteeing Call of Duty would remain on PlayStation - with feature and content parity - for "at least several more years beyond" Sony current contract.

During his FTC deposition this week, Ryan admitted he "wasn't particularly" happy with Microsoft's original proposal, but "hoped it was an opening salvo" - and we now have a more precise picture of his initial response, thanks to newly revealed emails, as spotted by The Verge's Tom Warren. In a reply dated 26th May, Ryan informed Spencer that Microsoft's proposal "did not fulfil" the objective of "ensuring Activision Blizzard games are available on PlayStation", and that the company had "serious concerns" which an enclosed counter-proposal from Sony was intended to address.

Ryan then outlined "two fundamental principles that are critical to mitigating the [acquisition's] potential negative impact to gamers".

"It is essential to agree that all Activision titles will remain on PlayStation irrespective of their original release dates or whether they can be classified as part of a particular franchise, just as they have been historically," he continued. "And this commitment needs to be a lengthy one, not just a few years after the acquisition".

Ryan also insisted an agreement must be made to "address the manner in which the games will be available. If Activision games are made available only on terms that are disadvantageous for PlayStation in comparison with other platforms, this could be tantamount to not making them available on PlayStation at all."

As an example, Ryan wrote, "Making Activision games available on PlayStation after those games have been made available on Xbox would be contrary to the sprit of Microsoft's commitment to keep Activision games on PlayStation, as well as unsatisfactory for gamers."

"As long as you agree to the fundamental principle - Activision games should not receive unequal treatment on the parties' subscription services - we are open to further discussing the details of how this might be accomplished," Ryan continued, adding "the equal treatment of Bethesda games would be a logical subject for the parties to discuss because it involves some of the same concerns as the availability and/or unequal treatment of Activision games".

Ryan's note to Spencer ended by requesting Microsoft confirm "these terms are acceptable as a framework for the parties to negotiate an appropriate written agreement", and that an agreement would be prepared upon doing so.

Microsoft's next key email, also revealed during the FTC case, came three months later, on 26th August 2022, when Xbox boss Phil Spencer reiterated that the Xbox company "would like to find a way to maintain [Sony's relationship as an important distributor of Activision content] once we've closed the Activision acquisition." Spencer added he would "continue to stand behind" a January's written agreement pledging to "keep all existing Activision console titles on Sony, including future versions in the Call fo Duty franchise or any other current Activision franchise on Sony, through 31st December, 2027."

Spencer repeated this would include content and feature parity, and promised there would be no "timed-exclusive releases of such content on Xbox consoles." However, he then added, "It is hard to align the principles set out in your email of 26th May, 2022 with Sony's leading role in the market. As I said before, we believe that keeping these titles on Sony, as we did with Minecraft, is the right things for the industry and gamers".

As per The Verge's report of this week's trial, Spencer is said to have included a list of titles that would remain on PlayStation as part of his August email, but Ryan, during his deposition, said the list was "not meaningful" and "represented a particular selection of older titles that would remain on PlayStation. For example Overwatch is on there but Overwatch 2 is not".

It's at this point in the timeline, following Spencer's email, that talks seemingly began to break down between Microsoft and Sony in a very public manner. Spencer began openly discussing certain aspects of its Sony negotiations with press, causing Ryan to call Microsoft's initial deal "inadequate on many levels".

"I hadn't intended to comment on what I understood to be a private business discussion," Ryan told GamesIndustry.biz at the time, "but I feel the need to set the record straight because Phil Spencer brought this into the public forum".

Since then, Sony has stood staunchly against Microsoft's proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard, even as more and more regulators around the world began approving the deal. Currently, the UK's CMA is the only regulator to have blocked the acquisition - a decision Microsoft will soon appeal - but the FTC has also expressed its displeasure at proposal.

Microsoft's court battle with the FTC is set to continue into this week as the antitrust agency attempts to secure an injunction to block the company's Activision Blizzard deal ahead of its own internal deliberations. So expect further reveals as proceedings continue.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.ign.com/articles/microsoft-ceo-if-it-were-up-to-me-id-get-rid-of-exclusives

Microsoft CEO: If It Were Up To Me, I'd Get Rid of Exclusives​

Satya Nadella "has no love" for the battle over exclusives in the video game industry.​

Exclusivity has been the biggest topic of debate during the Xbox FTC hearing, but if it were up to Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, the video game industry would move away from exclusive games altogether.

On the witness stand during today's proceedings, Nadella explained that he wants to get rid of console exclusives, but Microsoft has to fall in line with the market leaders to stay competitive.

"If it was up to me, I would love to get rid of the entire sort of exclusives on consoles, but that's not up to me to define," Nadella said. "Especially as a low share player in the console market that the dominant player there has defined market competition using exclusives, and so that's that's the world we live in... I have no love for that world."

The "dominant player" Nadella is referring to is certainly Sony, which builds its PlayStation library on the back of AAA exclusives like God of War, Horizon, Spider-Man, and more.

Nadella also explained that his general philosophy is to put software on more platforms, not fewer, saying, "That's the Microsoft I grew up in, I believe in that."

Earlier today, Activision CEO Bobby Kotick also spoke on the topic of exclusives, saying he has no plans to remove Call of Duty from PlayStation because the move would be "detrimental" to Activision's business.

https://www.eurogamer.net/sony-court-documents-removed-after-redacted-details-spotted

Sony court documents removed after redacted details spotted​

Not the Sharpie-est tool in the shed.

Sony has had its exhibits pulled from court after failing to properly redact financial information.

As part of the ongoing Microsoft vs FTC court case, Sony provided documentation detailing confidential information about its PlayStation business. As is custom, key details in this documentation were redacted. At least, they were meant to be.

Thanks to the retrospectively poor choice of using a Sharpie marker to redact the key information, it's easy to see the contents of these redactions now the document has been scanned.

As you can see in the image below, this documentation revealed that Horizon Forbidden West cost $212m (£168m) to develop over five years between 2017 and 2022, with 300 employees attached to the project.

Meanwhile, fellow PlayStation exclusive The Last Of Us Part 2 cost $220m (£174m) to make, with an employee count of roughly 200.


Sony's documentation was not suitably redacted.

Another piece of Sony documentation claimed that one million players spent 100 percent of their gaming time solely on Call of Duty. This second, similarly poorly redacted exhibit, is a letter from Sony head Jim Ryan to the FTC (see image below).

As reported by The Verge, Ryan's letter reads as follows:

"In 2021, over [14?] million users (by device) spent 30 percent or more of their time playing Call of Duty, over six million users spent more than 70 percent of their time on Call of Duty, and about one million users spent 100 percent of their gaming time on Call of Duty. In 2021, Call of Duty players spent an average of [116?] hours per year playing Call of Duty. Call of Duty players spending more than 70 percent of their time on Call of Duty spent an average of 296 hours on the franchise."


Jim Ryan's letter to the FTC.

None of this information is, admittedly, all that surprising. However, it is clearly a big error on Sony's part.

The court tried to remove the affected exhibits from the case, but it was too little too late. The damage has been done.

Elsewhere during last night's proceedings, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said he'd love to get rid of console exclusives.

 

[FreshCorpse]

I dunno if this has already been mentioned on this thread but the news in the financial reporting on the blocked deal is that it will be nearly impossible to overturn in the UK.

The CMA's (semi-governmental agency who have blocked it) decision can only be overturned if it can be demonstrated to the tribunal that they acted "irrationally, illegally or with procedural impropriety". The tribunal won't actually engage with any of the facts of the merger whatsoever - a successful appeal has to win solely on the basis of professional malpractice. That's quite a high bar given that the CMA's powers are, in law, extremely broad and it is staff with non-political civil-servant types who don't usually (in the UK) take bribes. Consequently the CMA tend to win most of these appeals.

It's actually a really hard job for MS/Activisions lawyers to get this overturned. The UK case won't be arguing the toss over call of duty or whatever - they need to find errors of procedure in the CMA's process. Hard.

 

[puur prutswerk]

It seems like Bill Gates is trying to monopolize gaming just before they roll out the real mark of the beast. No mark no gaming I guess.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.eurogamer.net/canada-sa...icrosoft-claims-all-but-one-regulator-onboard

Canada says it's "continuing to monitor" Activision deal as Microsoft claims "all but one" regulator onboard​

Accuses Microsoft of "factual inaccuracies" in court filings.

While Microsoft argues with the Federal Trade Commission in the US over its proposed $69bn acquisition of Activision Blizzard, Canada moved to refute the Xbox maker's claims that, the FTC excluded, "all but one" regulator around the world is onboard with its deal - noting that Canada is still 'monitoring the transaction'.

As reported by The Verge, Canada's Competition Bureau has written to Judge Corley, who is currently presiding over the FTC's Activision Blizzard case in the US, to correct certain "factual inaccuracies" in Microsoft's court filings.

Microsoft had told the court that "every single worldwide regulator that has examined the deal other than the FTC has rejected" the theory it would remove Call of Duty from PlayStation should the acquisition go through, and that all regulators agreed "withholding COD from Sony would be unprofitable and is thus not a serious concern." It also claimed "all but one foreign regulator" (namely the UK's CMA) had cleared the transaction.

Canada's Competition Bureau disagrees with those three points, however, writing to Judge Corley to stress it had "communicated to Microsoft and Activision's Canadian counsel that the Bureau has concluded that the proposed merger is likely to result in a substantial prevention and/or lessening of competition with respect to gaming consoles and multigame subscription services (as well as cloud gaming)". It noted it had also told Microsoft "the Bureau is continuing to monitor the transaction".

While many regulators around the world have approved Microsoft's proposed deal - including Europe - outliers remain. Alongside the Canadian Competition Bureau's latest warning it still has concerns about the acquisition, the US Federal Trade Commission is currently fighting Microsoft in court to secure an injunction to block the deal ahead of its own internal deliberations.

Over in the UK, the Competition and Markets Authority has blocked the acquisition citing concerns around the cloud gaming sector. Microsoft is set to appeal that decision in July.

https://www.eurogamer.net/sega-not-open-to-acquisitions-from-microsoft-or-elsewhere

Sega not open to acquisitions from Microsoft, or elsewhere​

But maintains strong relationship with Xbox.

Sega is not open to acquisitions from Microsoft or other companies, and will remain part of Sega Sammy Holdings Inc.

Earlier this week, as part of the FTC vs Microsoft court case, internal documents were released suggesting Microsoft had at one point considered buying the Japanese company to boost its Game Pass offering.

Sega's co-chief operating officer Shuji Utsumi has now dismissed speculation the company is still open to acquisitions.

"No, not now," he told Bloomberg. He declined to confirm if Microsoft had ever made a formal approach to acquire Sega.

Following the court case this week, Sega Sammy's shares have risen to their highest since 2007.

Utsumi did stress that Sega has a strong relationship with Microsoft - stronger even than with Nintendo or Sony.

"We are very close with Microsoft and have a great relationship with its management team," he said. "Microsoft particularly has a high regard for us. Xbox's Phil Spencer and Sarah Bond are really serious about values that video game fans emphasise."

That seems clear from the recent Xbox Games Showcase, which included announcements for Sega published games including Like a Dragon: Infinite Wealth, Persona 5 Tactica, Persona 3 Reload, and Metaphor: ReFantazio.

Microsoft had also considered purchasing the likes of Bungie, IO Interactive, Niantic, Supergiant Games, and even Square Enix.

It's clear the likes of Sega and Square Enix would have bolstered Microsoft's standing in Japan, where Xbox has traditionally struggled.

 

[Elttharion]

Theres is no good outcome from this. Either MS buys Activision and feel emboldened to acquire other publishers, maybe even some good ones this time, or the FTC blocks them and MS will have a giant pile of money laying around that they will use to fuck up the gaming industry.

 

[J1M]

Did Bobby just stab Phil in the back?

CEOs lie. WoW is already a multi-game subscription.

 

[lycanwarrior]

https://www.ign.com/articles/microsoft-ceo-if-it-were-up-to-me-id-get-rid-of-exclusives

Microsoft CEO: If It Were Up To Me, I'd Get Rid of Exclusives​

Satya Nadella "has no love" for the battle over exclusives in the video game industry.​

Exclusivity has been the biggest topic of debate during the Xbox FTC hearing, but if it were up to Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, the video game industry would move away from exclusive games altogether.

On the witness stand during today's proceedings, Nadella explained that he wants to get rid of console exclusives, but Microsoft has to fall in line with the market leaders to stay competitive.

"If it was up to me, I would love to get rid of the entire sort of exclusives on consoles, but that's not up to me to define," Nadella said. "Especially as a low share player in the console market that the dominant player there has defined market competition using exclusives, and so that's that's the world we live in... I have no love for that world."

The "dominant player" Nadella is referring to is certainly Sony, which builds its PlayStation library on the back of AAA exclusives like God of War, Horizon, Spider-Man, and more.

Nadella also explained that his general philosophy is to put software on more platforms, not fewer, saying, "That's the Microsoft I grew up in, I believe in that."

Earlier today, Activision CEO Bobby Kotick also spoke on the topic of exclusives, saying he has no plans to remove Call of Duty from PlayStation because the move would be "detrimental" to Activision's business.

https://www.eurogamer.net/sony-court-documents-removed-after-redacted-details-spotted

Sony court documents removed after redacted details spotted​

Not the Sharpie-est tool in the shed.

Sony has had its exhibits pulled from court after failing to properly redact financial information.

As part of the ongoing Microsoft vs FTC court case, Sony provided documentation detailing confidential information about its PlayStation business. As is custom, key details in this documentation were redacted. At least, they were meant to be.

Thanks to the retrospectively poor choice of using a Sharpie marker to redact the key information, it's easy to see the contents of these redactions now the document has been scanned.

As you can see in the image below, this documentation revealed that Horizon Forbidden West cost $212m (£168m) to develop over five years between 2017 and 2022, with 300 employees attached to the project.

Meanwhile, fellow PlayStation exclusive The Last Of Us Part 2 cost $220m (£174m) to make, with an employee count of roughly 200.


Sony's documentation was not suitably redacted.

Another piece of Sony documentation claimed that one million players spent 100 percent of their gaming time solely on Call of Duty. This second, similarly poorly redacted exhibit, is a letter from Sony head Jim Ryan to the FTC (see image below).

As reported by The Verge, Ryan's letter reads as follows:

"In 2021, over [14?] million users (by device) spent 30 percent or more of their time playing Call of Duty, over six million users spent more than 70 percent of their time on Call of Duty, and about one million users spent 100 percent of their gaming time on Call of Duty. In 2021, Call of Duty players spent an average of [116?] hours per year playing Call of Duty. Call of Duty players spending more than 70 percent of their time on Call of Duty spent an average of 296 hours on the franchise."


Jim Ryan's letter to the FTC.

None of this information is, admittedly, all that surprising. However, it is clearly a big error on Sony's part.

The court tried to remove the affected exhibits from the case, but it was too little too late. The damage has been done.

Elsewhere during last night's proceedings, Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said he'd love to get rid of console exclusives.

The guy looks like Skeletor for some reason.

 

[lycanwarrior]

I dunno if this has already been mentioned on this thread but the news in the financial reporting on the blocked deal is that it will be nearly impossible to overturn in the UK.

The CMA's (semi-governmental agency who have blocked it) decision can only be overturned if it can be demonstrated to the tribunal that they acted "irrationally, illegally or with procedural impropriety". The tribunal won't actually engage with any of the facts of the merger whatsoever - a successful appeal has to win solely on the basis of professional malpractice. That's quite a high bar given that the CMA's powers are, in law, extremely broad and it is staff with non-political civil-servant types who don't usually (in the UK) take bribes. Consequently the CMA tend to win most of these appeals.

It's actually a really hard job for MS/Activisions lawyers to get this overturned. The UK case won't be arguing the toss over call of duty or whatever - they need to find errors of procedure in the CMA's process. Hard.

They'll likely not include Actiblizz games in Gamepass for the UK or have a 3rd party distributor for the games there, from my understanding.

Hell, they might just pull the games out of the UK as the CEO has hinted at earlier.

 

[FreshCorpse]

I dunno if this has already been mentioned on this thread but the news in the financial reporting on the blocked deal is that it will be nearly impossible to overturn in the UK.

The CMA's (semi-governmental agency who have blocked it) decision can only be overturned if it can be demonstrated to the tribunal that they acted "irrationally, illegally or with procedural impropriety". The tribunal won't actually engage with any of the facts of the merger whatsoever - a successful appeal has to win solely on the basis of professional malpractice. That's quite a high bar given that the CMA's powers are, in law, extremely broad and it is staff with non-political civil-servant types who don't usually (in the UK) take bribes. Consequently the CMA tend to win most of these appeals.

It's actually a really hard job for MS/Activisions lawyers to get this overturned. The UK case won't be arguing the toss over call of duty or whatever - they need to find errors of procedure in the CMA's process. Hard.

They'll likely not include Actiblizz games in Gamepass for the UK or have a 3rd party distributor for the games there, from my understanding.

Hell, they might just pull the games out of the UK as the CEO has hinted at earlier.

I'd be interested in a link for that because my understanding is that it's the merger that has been blocked and they can't just do it anyway and then make something slightly different for the UK. The block is "extra-territorial" which means it applies worldwide.

Doubt MS will pull out of the UK. That's just stuff execs say when they are butthurt.

 

[lightbane]

When will this farce end? The joke has been going for too long.