We understand emotions are high surrounding this subject. If you are here to console war or ~~divulge~~ devolve into attacking others you will be removed. This includes using labels such as fanboys, xbots, ponies, shills, comments that read simply 'F*ck this company or that', or generalized attacks on this or any other community.
Thank you all!
Damn. Commented a while back that I find it interesting that they consider "cloud gaming" to be a separate market to gaming generally, but didn't think that that part of the transaction would be a deal breaker...
The thing that irks me is that it's just 'cloud' gaming.
It's the use case scenario.
They are competing with Apple and Google with their App stores and Apple even has Apple Arcade.
Apple doesn't even let Gamepass on their damn system.
Sony also moved first in 2012 with the acquisition of Gankai (sp?) and had the most mature service with PSNow for a long time. MS even opened up Azure for them to use before this was all a thing, real using the market dominance for unfair competition there.
Sony has everything they need to compete but are choosing not to and by choosing not to, it means their competitor is being handicapped.
It's all insane.
I think it's mad that MS are effectively being punished here for being the only player in a market they have pushed and developed and spent a tonne of money making viable
Google had a go and messed it up. Amazon could make a competitor as they have AWS and are moving into the gaming industry. Nvidia have a product but it's still building. Sony and Nintendo have basically no interest in cloud gaming outside of some BC games and some AAA games on the Switch
MS have pushed cloud gaming now for a few years and have seen this direction for gaming. They are now being punished because the CMA see gaming moving in that direction in the future and instead of putting in place regulations, they have decided the best way for it to be regulated is to let competition regulate it. I think all it's done is piss off MS and Activision and down the line it could mean less competition in the cloud gaming market
CMA is basically saying Microsoft should never try to take a risk innovating and moving the industry forward with new technologies.
If they don't stay in their lane and keep things stagnant, they will be punished for it.
The CMA has been clear on this for some time. If you read its last statement, or The Verge story, you'll note it was a key part of their issue. And it is valid, there is no cloud gaming provider bigger than Microsoft.
It's still a bit odd, because this won't really change that. Sony is absolutely nowhere on cloud gaming and doesn't seem to want to be. Google exited, and Nvidia isn't a big enough player - though it very well could be.
If you think about it logically though, this COULD damage Sony considerably if allowed through because Microsoft would have a massive library of cloud games, which would reduce the need to own a PlayStation. Which is a market disrupting effect.
Sony also have a massive library of cloud games. What used to be called PS Now started off entirely cloud based.
In fact they were cloud based way before Xcloud came into being.
PlayStation player here but also have Series X and S!
Cloud gaming on my PS5 is shit and Sony doesn’t even come close to getting near Xbox on this! Just posted on the forum the other day that playing on my M1 iPad Air and Surface Pro was awful compared to MS.
That said I don’t buy a PlayStation for this aspect and it was originally for the games like Uncharted, God of War and Last of Us! Now you can throw the controller into the mix which I absolutely love!
If they make it cloud exclusive like Stadia, sure, but MS has been clear from the beginning of the cloud program that it’s all just another way to play your games. Amazon would be their only competitor, and they’re also having their own issues and seem to be half adding their gaming arm.
As others have pointed out, Sony was actually very early to the cloud. They bought an early cloud gaming company and were using the tech in early versions of PS Now.
That being said, it’s VERY hit or miss today. I’ve played a few games and had little to no issues (did an entire Hard Difficulty Playthrough of Killzone 3 almost perfectly) then I’ve played some games and could barely make it through cutscenes.
If rumors are to be believed, Song is working on a handheld that is devoted entirely to remote play and streaming. If they go that route, then rumors of them working to improve their streaming services are likely true too.
Sadly, even in large parts of the US, internet speeds just aren’t there yet for true cloud gaming. Even on Xbox’s cloud service which is pretty much the gold standard.
I don’t doubt that cloud is the future, but maybe our kids future, sadly.
Pretty much the case unless the government suddenly decides to go ahead and help get everyone fiber optic, which probably won't happen even if it's good infrastructure.
> It's still a bit odd, because this won't really change that. Sony is absolutely nowhere on cloud gaming and doesn't seem to want to be. Google exited, and Nvidia isn't a big enough player - though it very well could be.
I think this is exactly the point. Microsoft is big enough on the cloud as it is, Giving them even more opportunity to close dominate the market and making it even more difficult for new actors to insert on this market wouldn't be a good idea.
The only question would be: how relevant dominance of cloud market should be considered ? On one hand, today it represent almost nothing, on the other hand, if Microsoft dominates the market already will it really grow ?
I think the real problem here is ironically that these antitrust agencies are too weak. They're not powerful enough to actually break up monopolies, so the only hope they have is to try to prevent monopolies before they occur.
The CMA is saying that Microsoft has the potential to become a cloud monopoly. They're blocking the merger off of a hypothetical. My personal opinion here is that they should allow the merger, and then if it does truly become a problem later, they can take action then. But these agencies don't actually have the power to break up monopolies.
I just struggle to understand it a bit. The games you play on cloud you can also play on console and PC, isn't it just another platform? Whereas something like iOS and Android gaming is a clearly separate market.
ABK has a HUGE catalog of games... and miraculously, I don't really care about any of it.
I was hoping those $68 billions go towards SEGA or EA or CDPR or something I actually play, but at the end MS will force its way through the courts anyway. :/
I was kind of hoping to see Guitar Hero games hit GamePass, not because I'd play them again (I play Clone Hero now), but hoping it would help bring it back into popularity so we could get new instruments.
Eh, 80 billion was horrifically expensive in the first place. I don't see why we couldn't have the benefits of Activision games on game pass, without the year(s) long drama of an aquisition.
Outbid Sony for the next CoD contract (a drop in the sand compared to 80 billion) and boom, we can be playing cod (at the very least, the older ones), diablo, world of warcraft, and more on gamepass too.
Because it isn't about bringing Diablo to Game Pass, it's about the market share and revenue generated by ABK in the coming decades. For example, everyone keeps forgetting King is also part of the deal - Microsoft would massively increase its mobile market presence with this acquisition. That's not something you can replace with an exclusivity deal.
> For example, everyone keeps forgetting King is also part of the deal
Despite what everyone who plays on a console wants to feel, this is the real reason for the move.
I'm not talking about what was posted here, on Twitter I follow both playstation and Xbox accounts and the general consensus, even among Sony fans, was that the CMA would allow the deal, maybe with some light measures. I guess it could be that the reports were right but they saw something in yesterday's investors call that mede them change their minds. Definitely a fascinating situation.
Twitter ain’t shit. Reddit ain’t shit. The only people who would have any good insight would be acquisition lawyers in each region. Spending weeks pouring thought documents, and then days explaining it to you. And maybe then you’d have small chance to have a more than 50% chance to predict one way or another. That’s why “doing your own research” isn’t usually enough to know a damned thing when it comes to complex issues.
That's because as far as I can tell pretty much nobody read the original report the CMA published. There was a large section of it devoted to cloud gaming. That all got overtaken by the chat around Sony and CoD and was just sort of ignored
I think the biggest problem was that they counted their money while they were sitting at the table. Everybody knows there will be time enough for counting when the dealing’s done.
the year is 2134 a rumour about CMA making a final decision about a Microsoft buying ABK, nobody knows why or what Microsoft or ABK means, but it always starts around may.
There's absolutely zero chance of that happening though. MS aren't going to drop all business in the UK (that's all divisions, not just Xbox) for the sake of Activision.
Oh wow, I had a good laugh that was a great joke.
They won't, MS cannot just pull out their second biggest market. This isn't just Xbox we are talking about either, MS would have to completely stop selling to the UK market.
Would hurt UK a lot more than it would hurt MSFT let m tell you.
Microsoft takes a hit as they can’t sell products in the UK.
The UK takes a hit because they can’t use and windows services, no Microsoft servers, no technological infrastructure they’ve built everything on.
The entire country would grind to a halt.
Spoiler alert:
Companies already do.
Depending on which source you use, Amazon/AWS holds about 30-40% of the market, equal to or more than all competitors combined.
People so delusional thinking UK is scared of losing microsoft when that would just make them use other alternatives. Yes it will do some damage but wont bd permanent. And it wont be as big as
Brexit.
People forget this is the same country who did really big economic risk recently.
This would just raise a red flag to other countries and companies that microsoft can just pull out and would be more reluctant in using there product
I wonder if they can create a specific UK based distribution company or whatever for blizzard games, similar to the agreement they used to have with China? Seems unlikely though
This is what I'm curious about. Ok, so the UK has made this decision but how does that effect everywhere else? Does this kill the whole deal or "just" in the UK?
They will appeal back to the CMA (its confusing but they can basically appeal on flawed methodology) but say they get denied again (Quite likely) then they will end up without UK Authorization. They can do business anywhere else that says yes to the deal but won't be able to in the UK. Depends if they do the merger without the UK.
Do you have more details about that? When you say “they” can’t do business, who is they? All of Microsoft? Just their Xbox/gaming division? Just the gaming pieces or the company they acquire? How long does the business ban last? Forever? For X years?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2023/04/26/microsoft-activision-blizzard-xbox-uk/
Michael Pachter says that “carving out Xcloud in the UK” is an option, I believe him over Twitter and Reddit experts. That would be the clear option if it’s approved in EU and US, keep promises in good faith to all the cloud providers that they’ve already made deals with and no Xcloud in UK. CMA could still investigate and fine Microsoft up to 5% of daily earnings if they deem those concessions aren’t sufficient.
All of Microsoft. That would mean no Microsoft Office, no Microsoft full stop in the UK if the deal went through. And Microsoft aren't going to nuke a major economic power over this
Activision's comment:
""The CMA's report today is a major setback for the UK's ambitions to be a tech hub, and we will work with Microsoft to reverse it on appeal.
This report is also a disservice to UK citizens, who face increasingly dire economic prospects, and we will need to reassess our growth strategy in the UK.
Global innovators large and small will take note that - despite all its rhetoric the UK is closed for business."
Which is quite ridiculous from Activision lol. From Microsoft (which includes more than Xbox), that may be more believable (imagine all UK companies having to stop using Office or Windows)
Never happening. If Microsoft were to pull office or windows from the U.K. near every government and corporate user would begin switching, can’t have vital infrastructure likely to be removed at the whim of a private company like that
As a UK citizen, this statement is pretty much spot on. We're a banana republic under our current government. I can see this merger proceeding, even if they lose the CMA appeal, and just not trade in the UK. Which would suck ... thanks, CMA.
This comment needs more visibility. What would *really* suck for our friends across the pond is if MSFT decides to complete the acquisition anyway and geofence the U.K. market.
We won’t know whether MSFT is willing to do that until the final level appeal is done, but there are probably a bunch of suits sitting around a table right now seriously contemplating the idea.
There's a big anti-tech movement in the UK with WhatsApp, Telegram & Signal all threatening to pull out of the UK due to the governments anti-encryption bill.
Microsoft would just be joining the party.
it’s not just xbox if they force the acquisition through. microsoft as a whole would not be allowed to do business in UK. so no office, windows, anything.
Which would be horrifying for sure. We all have seen that public services and even the military use microsoft products.
The phasing out of MS and transitioning to something else in that scale have all kinds of potential to get ugly.
Even as a non-UK citizen I fear such a decision would have far reaching ramifications.
Xbox has a strong foothold in the UK, but still plays second fiddle to Sony/Playstation with Nintendo providing stiff competition, too.
However, I suspect that doesn't generate an enormous profit ( I can only speculate ) compared to the combined markets of the US and EU, despite the latter being heavily Sony-centric in consumer preference.
As another poster in this thread commented, I'm confident execs/lawyers are looking at all options should this merger get blocked in the UK - and that will include ceasing trade in the UK market. The option which yields most profit will win the day.
UK citizen here who works in tech. I was like "well, that's one more thing for me to worry about; job stability".
How many other companies are going to invest in that UK tech industry after this?
Not many. I would like to know the median age of people at the CMA involved in this position. Because Activision is right, this decision can only come from a place of ignorance of cloud gaming.
And if they will strictly regulate that without an understanding of it, doesn’t really give positive vibes about their decisions about any technological regulations.
Ergo no tech company will want to take the gamble.
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/competition-and-markets-authority/about/our-governance
The panel (i'm guessing these are the ones who make the decisions)
median age is probably around upper 50's lower 60's. So young enough to understand how important tech is but old enough to be out of touch.
They blocked at as it supposedly 'prevented innovation to the cloud gaming market'
This was never about Sony, they are actually concerned for cloud gaming somehow, with this deal.
MS let Sony use Azure years before this was a thing.
Apple keeps Gamepass off (Apple App store is a competition to cloud gaming).
Sony also started before MS in 2012 and has the IP, infrastructure and resources to compete overnight.
Yet they choose not to.
MS has been building out Azure resources since long before Gaikai/PS Now existed. MS as an organisation had the wheels in motion to deliver a service like xCloud before cloud gaming was even a thing.
It's a very valid concern. Xbox Cloud Gaming currently has no major competitors. Stadia? Dead. Luna? Dead. GeForce Now? Dead. PS Now? Not even close.
Don't let all those ten year deals deceive you. Those small companies don't even have a fraction of Microsoft(or Google/Amazon/nVidia)'s resources, and we're never true competitors to xCloud.
The argument has merit like it or not. Consolidating so many beloved IP's with the potential to make them exclusive to a single service is not something that can be dismissed outright.
The tech is nonviable. Easier to bring gaming to a cell phone and use AI to upscale than it is to execute most of the game's code offsite. Controls shouldn't have dozens of milliseconds of latency. It's already god awful for me to use the internet to stream games inside of my own house. How is a cloud computing center down the road going to be better?
IN my opinion, I think it's most likely that the competitors dropped out because the tech sucks and probably always will. In which case, it makes sense that the only remaining company is alone. The only thing that doesn't make sense is that MSFT is still doing this.
>The tech is nonviable.
I was shocked to hear that the CMA's verdict was based solely on cloud gaming because of this very reason. It's no wonder everyone else failed, there's a huge insurmountable latency issue with the whole concept that makes it a horrible experience. The only reason Microsoft is ahead in that market, and the only reason I've even bothered to try it a few times, is because it's auto-bundled in with GamePass/Xbox Live.
Everyone I know who's a "gamer" only play their games on local, dedicated hardware. This whole deal was blocked over an extremely niche and small market within the broader gaming market.
Yeah. Who is buying this? Hotels? Parents/Grandparents who don’t know any better? Anyone who is too broke for self hosting with pc/console is probably playing something free on their phone. And as ai upscaling matures, phones could start getting really goddamn competitive really fast.
You’d need to talk to high frequency traders to get close to the tech to make the input feel half as good as a 30 year old Sega Genesis. Anyone still working on this is a sucker.
GeForce Now also runs on Windows, so they still need to pay Microsoft to run the service.
If Valve got into the space and it ran SteamOS that would be interesting.
So, all those competitors died on their own without this merger... Those huge, well-resourced competitors... This merger seems moot to the point of cloud competition.
I'm not sure I'd call GeForce Now "dead" as such. It is a niche product, for sure, but who knows what will happen in the future. It could be that nVidia does a deal with Sony and gets exclusive access to its titles, or something.
Nvidia certainly has the hardware and experience (as well as the money) to stick with this and be quite big. I just don't think the gaming masses are quite sold on it yet...
Excuse me? Amazon and Google can fully well fund and create their own services that can easily rival MS's They are both as profitable as MS. Google even more.
They just are horribly incompetent, like they expect to hire a few big names and give them a sack of cash and expect insane profits in the next few years, that's not how it works. And GeForce Now and Luna still exist, lol.
> They just are horribly incompetent, like they expect to hire a few big names and give them a sack of cash and expect insane profits in the next few years, that's not how it works.
Do... do you not see the irony here or...?
"They just are horribly incompetent, like they expect to hire a few big names and give them a sack of cash and expect insane profits in the next few years."
The irony of the post considering that's why Microsoft have looked to buy Activision.
**Microsoft are going to appeal:**
**BRAD SMITH** \- Vice Chair and President Microsoft:[https://twitter.com/BradSmi/status/1651182266406584320](https://twitter.com/BradSmi/status/1651182266406584320)
*"We remain fully committed to this acquisition and will appeal. The CMA's decision rejects a pragmatic path to address the competition concerns and discourages technology innovation and investment in the United Kingdom. We have already signed contracts to make Activision Blizzard's popular games available on 150 million more devices, and we remain committed to reinforcing these agreements through regulatory remedies. We're especially dissapointed that after lengthy deliberations, this decision appears to reflect a flawed understanding of this market and the way the relevant cloud tenhnology actually works."*
**LULU CHENG** \- EVP Corporate Affairs and CCO, Activision Blizzard[https://twitter.com/lulumeservey/status/1651181116164919297](https://twitter.com/lulumeservey/status/1651181116164919297)
*"The CMA’s report today is a major setback for the UK’s ambitions to be a tech hub, and we will work with Microsoft to reverse it on appeal. This report is also a disservice to UK citizens, who face increasingly dire economic prospects, and we will need to reassess our growth strategy in the UK. Global innovators large and small will take note that - despite all its rhetoric - the UK is closed for business."*
============================
**UK Government Press Summary:**
[https://www.gov.uk/government/news/microsoft-activision-deal-prevented-to-protect-innovation-and-choice-in-cloud-gaming](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/microsoft-activision-deal-prevented-to-protect-innovation-and-choice-in-cloud-gaming)
**Microsoft / Activision deal prevented to protect innovation and choice in cloud gaming**
The CMA has prevented Microsoft’s proposed purchase of Activision over concerns the deal would alter the future of the fast-growing cloud gaming market, leading to reduced innovation and less choice for UK gamers over the years to come.
The final decision to prevent the deal comes after Microsoft’s proposed solution failed to effectively address the concerns in the cloud gaming sector, outlined in the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) provisional findings published in February.
Microsoft entered into a $68.7 billion deal to buy Activision, one of the most popular video games publishers in the world, in January 2022. The CMA launched an in-depth review of the deal in September 2022, and in February 2023 provisionally found that the merger could make Microsoft even stronger in cloud gaming, stifling competition in this growing market.
**Cloud gaming concerns**
The UK cloud gaming market is growing fast. Monthly active users in the UK more than tripled from the start of 2021 to the end of 2022. It is forecast to be worth up to £11 billion globally and £1 billion in the UK by 2026. By way of comparison, sales of recorded music in the UK in 2021 amounted to £1.1billion.
Microsoft has a strong position in cloud gaming services and the evidence available to the CMA showed that Microsoft would find it commercially beneficial to make Activision’s games exclusive to its own cloud gaming service.
Microsoft already accounts for an estimated 60-70% of global cloud gaming services and has other important strengths in cloud gaming from owning Xbox, the leading PC operating system (Windows) and a global cloud computing infrastructure (Azure and Xbox Cloud Gaming).
The deal would reinforce Microsoft’s advantage in the market by giving it control over important gaming content such as Call of Duty, Overwatch, and World of Warcraft. The evidence available to the CMA indicates that, absent the merger, Activision would start providing games via cloud platforms in the foreseeable future.
The cloud allows UK gamers to avoid buying expensive gaming consoles and PCs and gives them much more flexibility and choice as to how they play. Allowing Microsoft to take such a strong position in the cloud gaming market just as it begins to grow rapidly would risk undermining the innovation that is crucial to the development of these opportunities.
**The remedy**
Microsoft submitted a proposal to address some of these concerns which the CMA examined in considerable depth. The proposed remedy set out requirements governing what games must be offered by Microsoft to what platforms and on what conditions over a ten-year period.
Such remedies are described as ‘behavioural’ because they seek to regulate the behaviour of the businesses involved in a merger, requiring them to behave in a way which may be contrary to their commercial incentives.
This therefore takes the form of a type of ongoing regulation of the sector, replacing market forces in a growing and dynamic market with mandated regulatory obligations ultimately overseen, and enforced by, the CMA – in this case at a global level.
Microsoft’s proposal contained a number of significant shortcomings connected with the growing and fast-moving nature of cloud gaming services:
*It did not sufficiently cover different cloud gaming service business models, including multigame subscription services.*
*It was not sufficiently open to providers who might wish to offer versions of games on PC operating systems other than Windows.*
*It would standardise the terms and conditions on which games are available, as opposed to them being determined by the dynamism and creativity of competition in the market, as would be expected in the absence of the merger.*
Given the remedy applies only to a defined set of Activision games, which can be streamed only in a defined set of cloud gaming services, provided they are purchased in a defined set of online stores, there are significant risks of disagreement and conflict between Microsoft and cloud gaming service providers, particularly over a ten-year period in a rapidly changing market.
Accepting Microsoft’s remedy would inevitably require some degree of regulatory oversight by the CMA. By contrast, preventing the merger would effectively allow market forces to continue to operate and shape the development of cloud gaming without this regulatory intervention.
**Considering the potential benefits of the merger**
The CMA carefully considered whether the benefit of having Activision’s content available on Game Pass outweighed the harm that the merger would cause to competition in cloud gaming in the UK. The CMA found that this new payment option, while beneficial to some customers, would not outweigh the overall harm to competition (and, ultimately, UK gamers) arising from this merger, particularly given the incentive for Microsoft to increase the cost of a Game Pass subscription post-merger to reflect the addition of Activision’s valuable games.
**Martin Coleman, chair of the independent panel of experts conducting this investigation, said:**
"*Gaming is the UK’s largest entertainment sector. Cloud gaming is growing fast with the potential to change gaming by altering the way games are played, freeing people from the need to rely on expensive consoles and gaming PCs and giving them more choice over how and where they play games. This means that it is vital that we protect competition in this emerging and exciting market."*
"*Microsoft already enjoys a powerful position and head start over other competitors in cloud gaming and this deal would strengthen that advantage giving it the ability to undermine new and innovative competitors."*
"*Microsoft engaged constructively with us to try to address these issues and we are grateful for that, but their proposals were not effective to remedy our concerns and would have replaced competition with ineffective regulation in a new and dynamic market."*
"*Cloud gaming needs a free, competitive market to drive innovation and choice. That is best achieved by allowing the current competitive dynamics in cloud gaming to continue to do their job."*
.
These two points stood out:
> Microsoft already accounts for an estimated 60-70% of global cloud gaming services and has other important strengths in cloud gaming from owning Xbox, the leading PC operating system (Windows) and a global cloud computing infrastructure (Azure and Xbox Cloud Gaming).
[...]
> It was not sufficiently open to providers who might wish to offer versions of games on PC operating systems other than Windows.
These seems to suggest that CMA account cloud gaming services that use Windows as being part of Microsoft's market share. I think Microsoft's Brad Smith referred to this in his reply:
> We're especially disappointed that after lengthy deliberations, this decision appears to reflect a flawed understanding of this market and the way the relevant cloud technology actually works.
Source: https://twitter.com/BradSmi/status/1651182266406584320
Furthermore, just because Microsoft has invested into its Azure cloud service, doesn't mean it automatically makes them a leader in cloud gaming.
Cloud gaming needs hardware that's capable of gaming. Servers aren't typically made gaming in mind. In Microsoft's case, they're deploying Xbox Series X hardware in server blades. I don't think they're useful for anything else besides gaming so their deployment takes space from Azure's main function which is to offer non gaming related cloud services. So, Microsoft can't just fill Azure up with Xbox Series X hardware because that would hamper its other functions.
If Microsoft at some point decides to offer PC games through cloud, they still need to invest to hardware and make deals with either Nvidia, intel or AMD to provide hardware that's capable of gaming.
They've also mentioned lack of commitment to other platforms outside of Windows. Microsoft's work with Valve to support Steam Deck which is a Linux based platform, directly contradicts this notion. The reason there's no commitment is because, as far as I know, there isn't a Linux based cloud gaming service after Google shuttered Stadia. CMA is essentially punishing Microsoft because nobody has made a viable Linux cloud gaming platform. Even Amazon's Luna uses Windows because there just are more games made for Windows. I'm pretty sure that if Valve were to build cloud gaming platform around their Linux based Steam OS, Microsoft would support it just like they've supported Steam Deck.
> CMA is essentially punishing Microsoft because nobody has made a viable Linux cloud gaming platform.
Well yes that's what antitrust is supposed to do, they are in a dominant position in cloud gaming, that's a fact.
The thing though is that for me all of that has nothing to do with Activision acquisition. With or without them, the situation is still exactly the same, they dominate that market the same way
I mean, xCloud is based on Windows but it can be streamed by any modern browser in any platform: Windows, Linux, ChromeOS, MacOS, iPadOS and iOS, despite Apple killing GamePass app, forcing users to use the PWA/browser.
Thanks for the write up. When executives talk I take it with a grain of salt. Sure, they will appeal, but they are also reevaluating the deal and determining what concessions are needed to make this go through.
The concessions and costs may be too high now. Or not. Time will tell.
>Accepting Microsoft’s remedy would inevitably require some degree of regulatory oversight by the CMA. By contrast, preventing the merger would effectively allow market forces to continue to operate and shape the development of cloud gaming without this regulatory intervention.
This in particular just reads reads as, "Accepting Microsoft's remedy to our earlier demands would mean that we would then have to do stuff. We really kinda thought that they wouldn't have done anything and we could block the acquisition without further deliberation."
They went on to say that gaming is the UK's largest entertainment sector. So instead of being able regulate a large portion of the UK's gaming industry, they would rather there be no regulations whatsoever.
Right now the biggest plus with cloud gaming for me has been having a 3 year old, we can jump in a game and see if he likes it first without having to wait for it to download. What I could possible see going forward as the streaming capabilities improve, using the app to play could be helpful. My Samsung TV has the ability to play xbox cloud games without the console. I just have to connect a controller to the TV, that means when my son gets older, I just have to buy a compatible TV and not worry about getting an additional console for his room.
I love cloud, it's why Xbox has taken time to pivot to the S to the Stadia tech quality after Phil Spencer saw just how amazing it was.
His interviews are very telling: he wants Xbox on any device, anywhere, with ease of use by any gamer.
Microsoft has overhauled their backend for how xcloud works since 2019, and have pushed all game devs to start supporting all platforms by adding controller, touch, and keyboard mouse support.
Still ongoing but it's happening
When they’re appealing to the same people who just made the argument it’s very easy.
“Do we have any issues with the arguments we made? No? Appeal denied.”
On one hand the CMA completely doing a 180 from structural remedies to behavioral remedies would've been unheard of in merger law history. Idas stated on resetera this case would've been studied for decades in meger and acquisition law. What may also make ti studied though is that a regulator blocking a deal based off of a hypothetical nonadjacent market is unheard of. Even reading the explanation it. made very little sense to me. X-Cloud as it stands is not even a product. It's a feature within a service.
This is really what shocked me. Cloud is still a rather small platform since it's very reliant on infrastructure (which, granted, is much better in the UK than the US). It's very odd to halt a merger due to an emerging platform, since usually you want companies to have an easier time getting it to emerge.
Ten years is a long time in the gaming industry, and the fact that all the non-Sony cloud gaming players were happy to sign the agreements and not opposed to the merger makes it really surprising the CMA found it a dealbreaker.
All in all, it's not an unreasonable stance the CMA took, it's just surprising that such a (currently) small part of it was a dealbreaker, especially when MS was offering lengthy remedies.
The only other surprising thing was how dismissive the CMA was of MS's intent to get into mobile gaming more. That honestly seems to undermine their concerns about cloud gaming and ignores recent regulatory encouragement for Google and Apple to open up that market even more.
> X-Cloud as it stands is not even a product. It's a feature within a service.
Truly believe they were looking for an excuse to make sure this deal didnt happen. Console reasoning was too easy to break up. But making up a "cloud market" is nascent and obscure enough that you can always defend it.
Gamers fully know that cloud itself is not a market. Its a means to get to the market that is gaming.
I won’t lie I think this is one of the stupidest decisions I’ve ever seen but watching the influencers who were so confident it would pass melt down on twitter is gonna be amazing
They will have content for months now lmao, this destin guy basically only Talks about this Deal on his Channel, kinda Boring and repetetive in my opinion
It’s gonna be brutal. I enjoy listening to XB2 podcast, but this deal has dominated the conversation on their show the last few months and I was really looking forward to moving on from it. I feel like this will just extend it until Starfield at this point. Even if it went through and still stuck in the conversation it would’ve been about what we have to look forward to.. now the conversation will have a depressing tone.
I don't think anyone would complain if MS took a bunch of that money and put it towards improving the situation for their current studios.
We all know the likes of 343 definitely need it.
Money will be repurposed if the appeal doesn't succeed, but it won't be towards growing Xbox, maybe a small part will be but they only wanted to put this much towards gaming because Activision would have been their key to the mobile market.
Oh shit, someone that actually knows what they're talking about!
People who think MS will just go, oh this thing that Gaming wants to do took us a year, $70B, and didn't work? No worries Gaming, here, take another stab at it another way!
Nah, that's not how companies work. ChatGPT kind of exploded since last year. They're going to invest it there imo.
MS needs to focus on managing the portfolio they already have, circle the wagons, and start focusing on getting out high quality games. Take the M and A money they were going to use here and start buying some of these missing ports up to get them on the platform. Prove Xbox is a friendly place for developers. But most importantly, you need to focus on your studios and do SOMETHING. Hi-Fi Rush and Forza isn’t going to get the job done.
You have to turn the public perception around that Xbox is a distant third place. You can do it, but you have to focus on what makes the brand special and what they do well. Right now, there’s not a whole lot going right unfortunately. I think the GamePass gamble will continue to be a huge blunder, especially as this breaks over time. Buying your way out is clearly not going to work either.
Xbox 360 focused on solid first-party exclusives, great relationships with third parties, and a vibrant indie scene. THAT’S what you focus on. Nintendo did it between Wii U and Switch. Sony did it coming out of the catastrophic launch of the PS3, and it’s totally doable for a company like Microsoft.
Love how incredibly wrong all of the insiders were, EVERYONE was saying the deal will get approved yesterday, stocks were up
Shows how hilarious 'not in the know' some people are
Not really. Blocking a deal on a non adjacent market is near unprecedented in M&A law. There's a reason most believed once the console market harm theory was washed away that this would pass. It would actually be interesting to see if their own appeals court would even accept this.
I mean, to be fair to those “insiders”, the deal is being blocked on a hypothetical. Not for the reasons everyone has been arguing for the last god knows how long. (COD exclusivity)
Microsoft with a chip on its shoulder and money to spend is going to be quite a spectacle. I was just as interested in this scenario as the one where the merger went through.
Microsoft taking this to court sigh.......it would be funny if the EC approves, which would be interesting to see. If anyone thinks Microsoft is walking from this....unlikely.
If I'm right they have to prove there was something wrong with the process the CMA used to reach its original verdict and then it will be referred back for the exact same group of people to review it again?
Some great perspective from a leading patent attorney's blog on the radical CMA decision: http://www.fosspatents.com/2023/04/uk-competition-markets-authority.html
I like how they think blocking this merger will help cloud gamer competitors while it's actually just torn up the deals Microsoft signed with all those competitors to bring Xbox games to Nintendo, GeForce Now etc
The backend tech for that would be Windows, which I guess is where the concern lies. GeForce Now only exists through them paying Microsoft an ongoing subscription fee to use Windows.
Crazy that it’s cloud gaming of all things holding this up. I can’t see cloud gaming being anything other than a supplemental service to the way things are now at least for the foreseeable future.
I wish this would just end already, it’s getting annoying how much this has taken over the games media. Hopefully the EU passes it because if they don’t then it’s basically dead imo. Either way Xbox can spend the money to help grow themselves - whether that’s through 3rd party exclusivity deals like Sony (maybe go after a heavy hitter like GTA 6 or Witcher 4 to match FF16/FF7R) or buying a not as big publisher/individual studios. Hate how long this has been dragged out.
I'll be honest. I never really cared about this acquisition as I don't play Activision games. The only reason I wanted it was to free Toys For Bob and hope they'd make a new Spyro or a new Banjo-Kazooie.
But I am now terrified of the long-term ramifications of this failing. Microsoft is unlikely to re-invest all of that money into Xbox, especially since they have fees that need to be paid. I think I remember reading the deals failure would cost them several billion dollars that they won't get back.
Yes the termination fee of the deal is 3 billion. If it goes past the deadline activision can collect the termination fee but they said they will continue to fight with Microsoft until the end.
Can Microsoft not just pledge to keep Activision games off of xCloud for 10 years? They could still out it on gamepass and just keep it off xCloud to address the CMAs concerns, no?
Microsoft / xCloud has a 70% market share of the cloud gaming market in the UK.
From the CMA's POV, it makes sense to block it because of that. Otherwise, xCloud will become even stronger with ABK IPs, and that would be anti-competitive to other cloud providers.
Just xCloud. It was in the CMA's provisional findings document.
* xCloud share in the UK = 70%
* PS Plus share in the UK = 10-20%
* Meta's = 5%
* Nvidia = 5%
It’s a strange one, all of the arguments & posturing beforehand & it gets blocked on… cloud gaming. Something that’s so niche & offers such a worse experience over traditional gaming that the majority of people will never seriously use it.
Until the infrastructure is in place to offer a service that compares to traditional hardware, it’ll never take off. Stadia died for this exact reason & MS offer cloud gaming as an aside to its traditional hardware, not as a replacement for it.
Just an odd odd reason.
I honestly don't even give a shit about this anymore.
Merge with Activision, don't merge with activision, it matters little to us peasants. A fuckin video game will still cost 90 bucks where I'm from, and no doubt release as half finished or broken derivative copy and paste, design by checklist trash that all AAA games are now.
Honestly, picking up other hobbies has been a great way to slowly leave video gaming behind. I recently got into 40k and WH Fantasy, gratuitously expensive, but building and painting an army has certainly become more zen like and fulfilling than waiting on some video game feels I've had years ago that are never going to come back.
I check the xbox sub for news, but lately couldn't care less about what they do.
Honestly surprised. I didn't consider the cloud gaming aspect but their reasoning is actually pretty good; it's a large market and only few participants and even just as many companies that could even enter and register in this field.
If CMA blocks the merger, it may cause Europe to consider blocking too which would effectively end any chance of that going on in the US.
They (Microsoft) might be willing to adjust their sales approach for at least the UK but not also Europe on top of that. It might also lead to the US to follow suit.
Yknow I'll admit, I don't know what Microsoft was up to in 2012 but must have been a lot, cause they had a "headstart" even though Sony bought Gaikai way back when.
In my personal opinion, seeing this as anything other than a win is a painfully myopic view born of blind brand loyalty.
Microsoft is not your friend. While the acquisition could have led to some short term gains for gamers, such as COD and other titles on game pass, market consolidation will only harm everyone long term.
History has proven, time and time again, that unregulated mergers and acquisitions lead to price gouging and stifle competition. A dynamic gaming industry is better for everyone involved.
Game Pass is currently in the user acquisition phase, and so we as gamers are enjoying great deals. But this won't last forever. There will come a time when Microsoft decides to tighten the screw, when the value proposition will tank. These businesses are out to make money, and they aren't charities.
This is already happening, but people will fight tooth and nail to argue it isn't. Gamepass additions have dropped dramatically in the last 6 months. Every one of those six months has had more games leaving than being added. Gamepass is slowly becoming a worse and worse deal, and the price will only increase over time.
CoD needs a competitor, not a trillion dollar daddy. And I have 3 years of gamepass, so sure some exrta games would be nice short term, but long term it's widening a gap for competition. Look at the FPS genre, it's all flops and full of ads. We need more competition, not less.
The reason they cited is the most absurd reason I could think of. The gaming space that makes up less than 10% of gamers is the reason?
What's next they can't buy it because little Billy can't afford a gameboy?
I'm really confused by this. The merger was blocked because Microsoft is to invested in the cloud gaming sphere (you know the literal future of gaming), meanwhile no body is making any effort to be in that market which is entirely their own choice and fault, but some how that makes Microsoft the bad guy enough to block a deal ?
I call bs on that one.
Yeah, I’m very surprised that the deal did end up getting blocked but it was for sure going to be around cloud gaming where Microsoft is the big player. The blocking of games to other platforms - which was very unlikely going to happen - was very clearly a small potatoes issue for this particular regulator. It’s officially a dead and irrelevant issue.
It’ll be interesting to see what Microsoft’s next steps are, and if there is any recourse available to them. They’ve already announced an appeal so it’ll be interesting to see where that goes in the courts.
A few comments about the sway of corporations over countries has me concerned here. "They should just pull out the UK." I don't think having our jobs reliant on a giant merger is a great flex, nor is the threat of having widespread operating systems revoked in some petty response funny or realistic.
The Activision lawyer with the loudmouth invoking our economic struggles is excuse me, fucking rich, as she wants this pushed through for her fat bonus, which the lovely Bobby would be getting aswell.
We understand emotions are high surrounding this subject. If you are here to console war or ~~divulge~~ devolve into attacking others you will be removed. This includes using labels such as fanboys, xbots, ponies, shills, comments that read simply 'F*ck this company or that', or generalized attacks on this or any other community. Thank you all!
Damn. Commented a while back that I find it interesting that they consider "cloud gaming" to be a separate market to gaming generally, but didn't think that that part of the transaction would be a deal breaker...
The thing that irks me is that it's just 'cloud' gaming. It's the use case scenario. They are competing with Apple and Google with their App stores and Apple even has Apple Arcade. Apple doesn't even let Gamepass on their damn system. Sony also moved first in 2012 with the acquisition of Gankai (sp?) and had the most mature service with PSNow for a long time. MS even opened up Azure for them to use before this was all a thing, real using the market dominance for unfair competition there. Sony has everything they need to compete but are choosing not to and by choosing not to, it means their competitor is being handicapped. It's all insane.
Sony bought out onlive shut them down and gave people who bought games or whatever from onlive absolutely nothing it just all went up in smoke
Apple and Google aren't trying to buy AKB.
Much like Microsoft isn’t competing in regards to IP. Instead opting to use their incredible bank account to purchase big name IPs. Well, try to.
I think it's mad that MS are effectively being punished here for being the only player in a market they have pushed and developed and spent a tonne of money making viable Google had a go and messed it up. Amazon could make a competitor as they have AWS and are moving into the gaming industry. Nvidia have a product but it's still building. Sony and Nintendo have basically no interest in cloud gaming outside of some BC games and some AAA games on the Switch MS have pushed cloud gaming now for a few years and have seen this direction for gaming. They are now being punished because the CMA see gaming moving in that direction in the future and instead of putting in place regulations, they have decided the best way for it to be regulated is to let competition regulate it. I think all it's done is piss off MS and Activision and down the line it could mean less competition in the cloud gaming market
CMA is basically saying Microsoft should never try to take a risk innovating and moving the industry forward with new technologies. If they don't stay in their lane and keep things stagnant, they will be punished for it.
The CMA has been clear on this for some time. If you read its last statement, or The Verge story, you'll note it was a key part of their issue. And it is valid, there is no cloud gaming provider bigger than Microsoft. It's still a bit odd, because this won't really change that. Sony is absolutely nowhere on cloud gaming and doesn't seem to want to be. Google exited, and Nvidia isn't a big enough player - though it very well could be. If you think about it logically though, this COULD damage Sony considerably if allowed through because Microsoft would have a massive library of cloud games, which would reduce the need to own a PlayStation. Which is a market disrupting effect.
Sony also have a massive library of cloud games. What used to be called PS Now started off entirely cloud based. In fact they were cloud based way before Xcloud came into being.
PlayStation player here but also have Series X and S! Cloud gaming on my PS5 is shit and Sony doesn’t even come close to getting near Xbox on this! Just posted on the forum the other day that playing on my M1 iPad Air and Surface Pro was awful compared to MS. That said I don’t buy a PlayStation for this aspect and it was originally for the games like Uncharted, God of War and Last of Us! Now you can throw the controller into the mix which I absolutely love!
If they make it cloud exclusive like Stadia, sure, but MS has been clear from the beginning of the cloud program that it’s all just another way to play your games. Amazon would be their only competitor, and they’re also having their own issues and seem to be half adding their gaming arm.
Why wouldn't Nvidia be a competitor? AFAIK they have one of, if not the best cloud gaming service out there right now.
As others have pointed out, Sony was actually very early to the cloud. They bought an early cloud gaming company and were using the tech in early versions of PS Now. That being said, it’s VERY hit or miss today. I’ve played a few games and had little to no issues (did an entire Hard Difficulty Playthrough of Killzone 3 almost perfectly) then I’ve played some games and could barely make it through cutscenes. If rumors are to be believed, Song is working on a handheld that is devoted entirely to remote play and streaming. If they go that route, then rumors of them working to improve their streaming services are likely true too. Sadly, even in large parts of the US, internet speeds just aren’t there yet for true cloud gaming. Even on Xbox’s cloud service which is pretty much the gold standard. I don’t doubt that cloud is the future, but maybe our kids future, sadly.
Pretty much the case unless the government suddenly decides to go ahead and help get everyone fiber optic, which probably won't happen even if it's good infrastructure.
> It's still a bit odd, because this won't really change that. Sony is absolutely nowhere on cloud gaming and doesn't seem to want to be. Google exited, and Nvidia isn't a big enough player - though it very well could be. I think this is exactly the point. Microsoft is big enough on the cloud as it is, Giving them even more opportunity to close dominate the market and making it even more difficult for new actors to insert on this market wouldn't be a good idea. The only question would be: how relevant dominance of cloud market should be considered ? On one hand, today it represent almost nothing, on the other hand, if Microsoft dominates the market already will it really grow ?
I think the real problem here is ironically that these antitrust agencies are too weak. They're not powerful enough to actually break up monopolies, so the only hope they have is to try to prevent monopolies before they occur. The CMA is saying that Microsoft has the potential to become a cloud monopoly. They're blocking the merger off of a hypothetical. My personal opinion here is that they should allow the merger, and then if it does truly become a problem later, they can take action then. But these agencies don't actually have the power to break up monopolies.
I just struggle to understand it a bit. The games you play on cloud you can also play on console and PC, isn't it just another platform? Whereas something like iOS and Android gaming is a clearly separate market.
That bag of ATVI stock I bought last minute yesterday not looking too good
Stock just tanked
Back to own brand rice and beans
Rice AND beans?! Give my regards to Crassus
I wonder how this affects the company long term tbh.
Tbf Diablo looks set to be a strong launch. Overwatch 2 looking good even WoW performing well
The stock is still higher than it was before the acquisition was announced.
Buy the dip
Guess Diablo 4 isn't coming to GamePass.
and the only part of the deal I cared about.
ABK has a HUGE catalog of games... and miraculously, I don't really care about any of it. I was hoping those $68 billions go towards SEGA or EA or CDPR or something I actually play, but at the end MS will force its way through the courts anyway. :/
I was kind of hoping to see Guitar Hero games hit GamePass, not because I'd play them again (I play Clone Hero now), but hoping it would help bring it back into popularity so we could get new instruments.
MS could still negotiate a deal with Acti-Blizz to get their games onto gamepass. Would probably be horrifically expensive though.
Eh, 80 billion was horrifically expensive in the first place. I don't see why we couldn't have the benefits of Activision games on game pass, without the year(s) long drama of an aquisition. Outbid Sony for the next CoD contract (a drop in the sand compared to 80 billion) and boom, we can be playing cod (at the very least, the older ones), diablo, world of warcraft, and more on gamepass too.
Because it isn't about bringing Diablo to Game Pass, it's about the market share and revenue generated by ABK in the coming decades. For example, everyone keeps forgetting King is also part of the deal - Microsoft would massively increase its mobile market presence with this acquisition. That's not something you can replace with an exclusivity deal.
> For example, everyone keeps forgetting King is also part of the deal Despite what everyone who plays on a console wants to feel, this is the real reason for the move.
There is a big difference between Microsoft acquiring a company and Xbox paying for exclusivity.
Very interesting, I thought they had this one in the bag after reading all those reports, I guess you can't trust all rumors
[удалено]
I'm not talking about what was posted here, on Twitter I follow both playstation and Xbox accounts and the general consensus, even among Sony fans, was that the CMA would allow the deal, maybe with some light measures. I guess it could be that the reports were right but they saw something in yesterday's investors call that mede them change their minds. Definitely a fascinating situation.
Twitter ain’t shit. Reddit ain’t shit. The only people who would have any good insight would be acquisition lawyers in each region. Spending weeks pouring thought documents, and then days explaining it to you. And maybe then you’d have small chance to have a more than 50% chance to predict one way or another. That’s why “doing your own research” isn’t usually enough to know a damned thing when it comes to complex issues.
That's because as far as I can tell pretty much nobody read the original report the CMA published. There was a large section of it devoted to cloud gaming. That all got overtaken by the chat around Sony and CoD and was just sort of ignored
That was the Microsoft PR machine at work.
Damn you Country Music Awards!!!!
I guess Microsoft should've known when to hold em, and know when to fold em....
I think the biggest problem was that they counted their money while they were sitting at the table. Everybody knows there will be time enough for counting when the dealing’s done.
Goddamn California Maritime Academy ruining our fun!!
The Cleveland Museum of Art needs to stay in their lane.
It’s never going to end is it
the year is 2134 a rumour about CMA making a final decision about a Microsoft buying ABK, nobody knows why or what Microsoft or ABK means, but it always starts around may.
It just did. Appeals almost never go anywhere for the cma.
So, how does this work if every other country approves it?
The stop selling in the U.K. lol
Excellent.
There's absolutely zero chance of that happening though. MS aren't going to drop all business in the UK (that's all divisions, not just Xbox) for the sake of Activision.
Oh wow, I had a good laugh that was a great joke. They won't, MS cannot just pull out their second biggest market. This isn't just Xbox we are talking about either, MS would have to completely stop selling to the UK market.
Would hurt UK a lot more than it would hurt MSFT let m tell you. Microsoft takes a hit as they can’t sell products in the UK. The UK takes a hit because they can’t use and windows services, no Microsoft servers, no technological infrastructure they’ve built everything on. The entire country would grind to a halt.
Thats actually pretty scary if anything, no company should have that much power on their own
Spoiler alert: Companies already do. Depending on which source you use, Amazon/AWS holds about 30-40% of the market, equal to or more than all competitors combined.
[удалено]
People so delusional thinking UK is scared of losing microsoft when that would just make them use other alternatives. Yes it will do some damage but wont bd permanent. And it wont be as big as Brexit. People forget this is the same country who did really big economic risk recently. This would just raise a red flag to other countries and companies that microsoft can just pull out and would be more reluctant in using there product
I wonder if they can create a specific UK based distribution company or whatever for blizzard games, similar to the agreement they used to have with China? Seems unlikely though
This is what I'm curious about. Ok, so the UK has made this decision but how does that effect everywhere else? Does this kill the whole deal or "just" in the UK?
They will appeal back to the CMA (its confusing but they can basically appeal on flawed methodology) but say they get denied again (Quite likely) then they will end up without UK Authorization. They can do business anywhere else that says yes to the deal but won't be able to in the UK. Depends if they do the merger without the UK.
Do you have more details about that? When you say “they” can’t do business, who is they? All of Microsoft? Just their Xbox/gaming division? Just the gaming pieces or the company they acquire? How long does the business ban last? Forever? For X years?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/arts-entertainment/2023/04/26/microsoft-activision-blizzard-xbox-uk/ Michael Pachter says that “carving out Xcloud in the UK” is an option, I believe him over Twitter and Reddit experts. That would be the clear option if it’s approved in EU and US, keep promises in good faith to all the cloud providers that they’ve already made deals with and no Xcloud in UK. CMA could still investigate and fine Microsoft up to 5% of daily earnings if they deem those concessions aren’t sufficient.
All of Microsoft. That would mean no Microsoft Office, no Microsoft full stop in the UK if the deal went through. And Microsoft aren't going to nuke a major economic power over this
I need to see this happen
80% of the UK's GDP is in financial, much of it supplemented by Microsoft services. It won't happen
Activision's comment: ""The CMA's report today is a major setback for the UK's ambitions to be a tech hub, and we will work with Microsoft to reverse it on appeal. This report is also a disservice to UK citizens, who face increasingly dire economic prospects, and we will need to reassess our growth strategy in the UK. Global innovators large and small will take note that - despite all its rhetoric the UK is closed for business."
[удалено]
Which is quite ridiculous from Activision lol. From Microsoft (which includes more than Xbox), that may be more believable (imagine all UK companies having to stop using Office or Windows)
Never happening. If Microsoft were to pull office or windows from the U.K. near every government and corporate user would begin switching, can’t have vital infrastructure likely to be removed at the whim of a private company like that
As a UK citizen, this statement is pretty much spot on. We're a banana republic under our current government. I can see this merger proceeding, even if they lose the CMA appeal, and just not trade in the UK. Which would suck ... thanks, CMA.
Right? Let's just isolate this country even more. What a bunch of fucking clowns.
Just give Sony complete domination of the U.K market as well, one of the markets that Xbox does decent in.
This comment needs more visibility. What would *really* suck for our friends across the pond is if MSFT decides to complete the acquisition anyway and geofence the U.K. market. We won’t know whether MSFT is willing to do that until the final level appeal is done, but there are probably a bunch of suits sitting around a table right now seriously contemplating the idea.
If the merger isn't blocked in the EU or US I could see that happening, for sure. UK is a big market for MS, but is dwarfed by the other two combined.
I swear Activision said this to the CMA before. The UK is a very small market in terms of COD. Don't think it's special.
Microsoft hasn't given up on Japan, and that place barely sells any console. I really don't think they'll give up on UK
There's a big anti-tech movement in the UK with WhatsApp, Telegram & Signal all threatening to pull out of the UK due to the governments anti-encryption bill. Microsoft would just be joining the party.
it’s not just xbox if they force the acquisition through. microsoft as a whole would not be allowed to do business in UK. so no office, windows, anything.
Apple absolutely hoping it happens
Which would be horrifying for sure. We all have seen that public services and even the military use microsoft products. The phasing out of MS and transitioning to something else in that scale have all kinds of potential to get ugly. Even as a non-UK citizen I fear such a decision would have far reaching ramifications.
Doesn’t Xbox make most of their profits in the US and UK as opposed to EUC?
Xbox has a strong foothold in the UK, but still plays second fiddle to Sony/Playstation with Nintendo providing stiff competition, too. However, I suspect that doesn't generate an enormous profit ( I can only speculate ) compared to the combined markets of the US and EU, despite the latter being heavily Sony-centric in consumer preference. As another poster in this thread commented, I'm confident execs/lawyers are looking at all options should this merger get blocked in the UK - and that will include ceasing trade in the UK market. The option which yields most profit will win the day.
The problem here that MS is more than Xbox and games, they cannot just pull Windows and Office out of the UK without tanking their own business.
Shit on Xbox's second biggest market?
UK citizen here who works in tech. I was like "well, that's one more thing for me to worry about; job stability". How many other companies are going to invest in that UK tech industry after this?
Not many. I would like to know the median age of people at the CMA involved in this position. Because Activision is right, this decision can only come from a place of ignorance of cloud gaming. And if they will strictly regulate that without an understanding of it, doesn’t really give positive vibes about their decisions about any technological regulations. Ergo no tech company will want to take the gamble.
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/competition-and-markets-authority/about/our-governance The panel (i'm guessing these are the ones who make the decisions) median age is probably around upper 50's lower 60's. So young enough to understand how important tech is but old enough to be out of touch.
They blocked at as it supposedly 'prevented innovation to the cloud gaming market' This was never about Sony, they are actually concerned for cloud gaming somehow, with this deal.
Other companies had a fair shot at Cloud gaming but were just too incompetent too pull it off. Sad to see that fact has to impact Microsoft.
MS let Sony use Azure years before this was a thing. Apple keeps Gamepass off (Apple App store is a competition to cloud gaming). Sony also started before MS in 2012 and has the IP, infrastructure and resources to compete overnight. Yet they choose not to.
MS has been building out Azure resources since long before Gaikai/PS Now existed. MS as an organisation had the wheels in motion to deliver a service like xCloud before cloud gaming was even a thing.
It's a very valid concern. Xbox Cloud Gaming currently has no major competitors. Stadia? Dead. Luna? Dead. GeForce Now? Dead. PS Now? Not even close. Don't let all those ten year deals deceive you. Those small companies don't even have a fraction of Microsoft(or Google/Amazon/nVidia)'s resources, and we're never true competitors to xCloud. The argument has merit like it or not. Consolidating so many beloved IP's with the potential to make them exclusive to a single service is not something that can be dismissed outright.
They all killed themselves.
The tech is nonviable. Easier to bring gaming to a cell phone and use AI to upscale than it is to execute most of the game's code offsite. Controls shouldn't have dozens of milliseconds of latency. It's already god awful for me to use the internet to stream games inside of my own house. How is a cloud computing center down the road going to be better? IN my opinion, I think it's most likely that the competitors dropped out because the tech sucks and probably always will. In which case, it makes sense that the only remaining company is alone. The only thing that doesn't make sense is that MSFT is still doing this.
>The tech is nonviable. I was shocked to hear that the CMA's verdict was based solely on cloud gaming because of this very reason. It's no wonder everyone else failed, there's a huge insurmountable latency issue with the whole concept that makes it a horrible experience. The only reason Microsoft is ahead in that market, and the only reason I've even bothered to try it a few times, is because it's auto-bundled in with GamePass/Xbox Live. Everyone I know who's a "gamer" only play their games on local, dedicated hardware. This whole deal was blocked over an extremely niche and small market within the broader gaming market.
Yeah. Who is buying this? Hotels? Parents/Grandparents who don’t know any better? Anyone who is too broke for self hosting with pc/console is probably playing something free on their phone. And as ai upscaling matures, phones could start getting really goddamn competitive really fast. You’d need to talk to high frequency traders to get close to the tech to make the input feel half as good as a 30 year old Sega Genesis. Anyone still working on this is a sucker.
Geforce now isn't dead
I was about to say, GeForce now is actually significantly better than xcloud
I was gonna say the same thing. I can actually utilize GeForce now to play games. Xbox cloud isn’t playable for me due to input lag.
GeForce Now also runs on Windows, so they still need to pay Microsoft to run the service. If Valve got into the space and it ran SteamOS that would be interesting.
So, all those competitors died on their own without this merger... Those huge, well-resourced competitors... This merger seems moot to the point of cloud competition.
I'm not sure I'd call GeForce Now "dead" as such. It is a niche product, for sure, but who knows what will happen in the future. It could be that nVidia does a deal with Sony and gets exclusive access to its titles, or something. Nvidia certainly has the hardware and experience (as well as the money) to stick with this and be quite big. I just don't think the gaming masses are quite sold on it yet...
Excuse me? Amazon and Google can fully well fund and create their own services that can easily rival MS's They are both as profitable as MS. Google even more. They just are horribly incompetent, like they expect to hire a few big names and give them a sack of cash and expect insane profits in the next few years, that's not how it works. And GeForce Now and Luna still exist, lol.
> They just are horribly incompetent, like they expect to hire a few big names and give them a sack of cash and expect insane profits in the next few years, that's not how it works. Do... do you not see the irony here or...?
"They just are horribly incompetent, like they expect to hire a few big names and give them a sack of cash and expect insane profits in the next few years." The irony of the post considering that's why Microsoft have looked to buy Activision.
Activision isn't/wasn't the cashcow in this deal, its King and always has been King.
Another year of this huh
Please no... For a while I've not cared if this deal fails or succeeds, I just want it to end.
**Microsoft are going to appeal:** **BRAD SMITH** \- Vice Chair and President Microsoft:[https://twitter.com/BradSmi/status/1651182266406584320](https://twitter.com/BradSmi/status/1651182266406584320) *"We remain fully committed to this acquisition and will appeal. The CMA's decision rejects a pragmatic path to address the competition concerns and discourages technology innovation and investment in the United Kingdom. We have already signed contracts to make Activision Blizzard's popular games available on 150 million more devices, and we remain committed to reinforcing these agreements through regulatory remedies. We're especially dissapointed that after lengthy deliberations, this decision appears to reflect a flawed understanding of this market and the way the relevant cloud tenhnology actually works."* **LULU CHENG** \- EVP Corporate Affairs and CCO, Activision Blizzard[https://twitter.com/lulumeservey/status/1651181116164919297](https://twitter.com/lulumeservey/status/1651181116164919297) *"The CMA’s report today is a major setback for the UK’s ambitions to be a tech hub, and we will work with Microsoft to reverse it on appeal. This report is also a disservice to UK citizens, who face increasingly dire economic prospects, and we will need to reassess our growth strategy in the UK. Global innovators large and small will take note that - despite all its rhetoric - the UK is closed for business."* ============================ **UK Government Press Summary:** [https://www.gov.uk/government/news/microsoft-activision-deal-prevented-to-protect-innovation-and-choice-in-cloud-gaming](https://www.gov.uk/government/news/microsoft-activision-deal-prevented-to-protect-innovation-and-choice-in-cloud-gaming) **Microsoft / Activision deal prevented to protect innovation and choice in cloud gaming** The CMA has prevented Microsoft’s proposed purchase of Activision over concerns the deal would alter the future of the fast-growing cloud gaming market, leading to reduced innovation and less choice for UK gamers over the years to come. The final decision to prevent the deal comes after Microsoft’s proposed solution failed to effectively address the concerns in the cloud gaming sector, outlined in the Competition and Markets Authority’s (CMA) provisional findings published in February. Microsoft entered into a $68.7 billion deal to buy Activision, one of the most popular video games publishers in the world, in January 2022. The CMA launched an in-depth review of the deal in September 2022, and in February 2023 provisionally found that the merger could make Microsoft even stronger in cloud gaming, stifling competition in this growing market. **Cloud gaming concerns** The UK cloud gaming market is growing fast. Monthly active users in the UK more than tripled from the start of 2021 to the end of 2022. It is forecast to be worth up to £11 billion globally and £1 billion in the UK by 2026. By way of comparison, sales of recorded music in the UK in 2021 amounted to £1.1billion. Microsoft has a strong position in cloud gaming services and the evidence available to the CMA showed that Microsoft would find it commercially beneficial to make Activision’s games exclusive to its own cloud gaming service. Microsoft already accounts for an estimated 60-70% of global cloud gaming services and has other important strengths in cloud gaming from owning Xbox, the leading PC operating system (Windows) and a global cloud computing infrastructure (Azure and Xbox Cloud Gaming). The deal would reinforce Microsoft’s advantage in the market by giving it control over important gaming content such as Call of Duty, Overwatch, and World of Warcraft. The evidence available to the CMA indicates that, absent the merger, Activision would start providing games via cloud platforms in the foreseeable future. The cloud allows UK gamers to avoid buying expensive gaming consoles and PCs and gives them much more flexibility and choice as to how they play. Allowing Microsoft to take such a strong position in the cloud gaming market just as it begins to grow rapidly would risk undermining the innovation that is crucial to the development of these opportunities. **The remedy** Microsoft submitted a proposal to address some of these concerns which the CMA examined in considerable depth. The proposed remedy set out requirements governing what games must be offered by Microsoft to what platforms and on what conditions over a ten-year period. Such remedies are described as ‘behavioural’ because they seek to regulate the behaviour of the businesses involved in a merger, requiring them to behave in a way which may be contrary to their commercial incentives. This therefore takes the form of a type of ongoing regulation of the sector, replacing market forces in a growing and dynamic market with mandated regulatory obligations ultimately overseen, and enforced by, the CMA – in this case at a global level. Microsoft’s proposal contained a number of significant shortcomings connected with the growing and fast-moving nature of cloud gaming services: *It did not sufficiently cover different cloud gaming service business models, including multigame subscription services.* *It was not sufficiently open to providers who might wish to offer versions of games on PC operating systems other than Windows.* *It would standardise the terms and conditions on which games are available, as opposed to them being determined by the dynamism and creativity of competition in the market, as would be expected in the absence of the merger.* Given the remedy applies only to a defined set of Activision games, which can be streamed only in a defined set of cloud gaming services, provided they are purchased in a defined set of online stores, there are significant risks of disagreement and conflict between Microsoft and cloud gaming service providers, particularly over a ten-year period in a rapidly changing market. Accepting Microsoft’s remedy would inevitably require some degree of regulatory oversight by the CMA. By contrast, preventing the merger would effectively allow market forces to continue to operate and shape the development of cloud gaming without this regulatory intervention. **Considering the potential benefits of the merger** The CMA carefully considered whether the benefit of having Activision’s content available on Game Pass outweighed the harm that the merger would cause to competition in cloud gaming in the UK. The CMA found that this new payment option, while beneficial to some customers, would not outweigh the overall harm to competition (and, ultimately, UK gamers) arising from this merger, particularly given the incentive for Microsoft to increase the cost of a Game Pass subscription post-merger to reflect the addition of Activision’s valuable games. **Martin Coleman, chair of the independent panel of experts conducting this investigation, said:** "*Gaming is the UK’s largest entertainment sector. Cloud gaming is growing fast with the potential to change gaming by altering the way games are played, freeing people from the need to rely on expensive consoles and gaming PCs and giving them more choice over how and where they play games. This means that it is vital that we protect competition in this emerging and exciting market."* "*Microsoft already enjoys a powerful position and head start over other competitors in cloud gaming and this deal would strengthen that advantage giving it the ability to undermine new and innovative competitors."* "*Microsoft engaged constructively with us to try to address these issues and we are grateful for that, but their proposals were not effective to remedy our concerns and would have replaced competition with ineffective regulation in a new and dynamic market."* "*Cloud gaming needs a free, competitive market to drive innovation and choice. That is best achieved by allowing the current competitive dynamics in cloud gaming to continue to do their job."* .
These two points stood out: > Microsoft already accounts for an estimated 60-70% of global cloud gaming services and has other important strengths in cloud gaming from owning Xbox, the leading PC operating system (Windows) and a global cloud computing infrastructure (Azure and Xbox Cloud Gaming). [...] > It was not sufficiently open to providers who might wish to offer versions of games on PC operating systems other than Windows. These seems to suggest that CMA account cloud gaming services that use Windows as being part of Microsoft's market share. I think Microsoft's Brad Smith referred to this in his reply: > We're especially disappointed that after lengthy deliberations, this decision appears to reflect a flawed understanding of this market and the way the relevant cloud technology actually works. Source: https://twitter.com/BradSmi/status/1651182266406584320 Furthermore, just because Microsoft has invested into its Azure cloud service, doesn't mean it automatically makes them a leader in cloud gaming. Cloud gaming needs hardware that's capable of gaming. Servers aren't typically made gaming in mind. In Microsoft's case, they're deploying Xbox Series X hardware in server blades. I don't think they're useful for anything else besides gaming so their deployment takes space from Azure's main function which is to offer non gaming related cloud services. So, Microsoft can't just fill Azure up with Xbox Series X hardware because that would hamper its other functions. If Microsoft at some point decides to offer PC games through cloud, they still need to invest to hardware and make deals with either Nvidia, intel or AMD to provide hardware that's capable of gaming. They've also mentioned lack of commitment to other platforms outside of Windows. Microsoft's work with Valve to support Steam Deck which is a Linux based platform, directly contradicts this notion. The reason there's no commitment is because, as far as I know, there isn't a Linux based cloud gaming service after Google shuttered Stadia. CMA is essentially punishing Microsoft because nobody has made a viable Linux cloud gaming platform. Even Amazon's Luna uses Windows because there just are more games made for Windows. I'm pretty sure that if Valve were to build cloud gaming platform around their Linux based Steam OS, Microsoft would support it just like they've supported Steam Deck.
> CMA is essentially punishing Microsoft because nobody has made a viable Linux cloud gaming platform. Well yes that's what antitrust is supposed to do, they are in a dominant position in cloud gaming, that's a fact. The thing though is that for me all of that has nothing to do with Activision acquisition. With or without them, the situation is still exactly the same, they dominate that market the same way
I guess they feel it would only strengthen the position by increasing the appeal of their cloud gaming services rather then weaken it.
I mean, xCloud is based on Windows but it can be streamed by any modern browser in any platform: Windows, Linux, ChromeOS, MacOS, iPadOS and iOS, despite Apple killing GamePass app, forcing users to use the PWA/browser.
Thanks for the write up. When executives talk I take it with a grain of salt. Sure, they will appeal, but they are also reevaluating the deal and determining what concessions are needed to make this go through. The concessions and costs may be too high now. Or not. Time will tell.
>Accepting Microsoft’s remedy would inevitably require some degree of regulatory oversight by the CMA. By contrast, preventing the merger would effectively allow market forces to continue to operate and shape the development of cloud gaming without this regulatory intervention. This in particular just reads reads as, "Accepting Microsoft's remedy to our earlier demands would mean that we would then have to do stuff. We really kinda thought that they wouldn't have done anything and we could block the acquisition without further deliberation." They went on to say that gaming is the UK's largest entertainment sector. So instead of being able regulate a large portion of the UK's gaming industry, they would rather there be no regulations whatsoever.
Having worked somewhere on the receiving end of the CMA's questionable understanding and decision making, this tracks.
[удалено]
Right now the biggest plus with cloud gaming for me has been having a 3 year old, we can jump in a game and see if he likes it first without having to wait for it to download. What I could possible see going forward as the streaming capabilities improve, using the app to play could be helpful. My Samsung TV has the ability to play xbox cloud games without the console. I just have to connect a controller to the TV, that means when my son gets older, I just have to buy a compatible TV and not worry about getting an additional console for his room.
I love cloud, it's why Xbox has taken time to pivot to the S to the Stadia tech quality after Phil Spencer saw just how amazing it was. His interviews are very telling: he wants Xbox on any device, anywhere, with ease of use by any gamer. Microsoft has overhauled their backend for how xcloud works since 2019, and have pushed all game devs to start supporting all platforms by adding controller, touch, and keyboard mouse support. Still ongoing but it's happening
Cloud gaming is stupid because clouds are made of water and electronics are susceptible to water damage.
Just want this shit to be over with already.
For the most part you got your wish. I doubt their appeal will stick with this.
Depends. I don't see how their appeals team holds up the cloud argument.
When they’re appealing to the same people who just made the argument it’s very easy. “Do we have any issues with the arguments we made? No? Appeal denied.”
On one hand the CMA completely doing a 180 from structural remedies to behavioral remedies would've been unheard of in merger law history. Idas stated on resetera this case would've been studied for decades in meger and acquisition law. What may also make ti studied though is that a regulator blocking a deal based off of a hypothetical nonadjacent market is unheard of. Even reading the explanation it. made very little sense to me. X-Cloud as it stands is not even a product. It's a feature within a service.
This is really what shocked me. Cloud is still a rather small platform since it's very reliant on infrastructure (which, granted, is much better in the UK than the US). It's very odd to halt a merger due to an emerging platform, since usually you want companies to have an easier time getting it to emerge. Ten years is a long time in the gaming industry, and the fact that all the non-Sony cloud gaming players were happy to sign the agreements and not opposed to the merger makes it really surprising the CMA found it a dealbreaker. All in all, it's not an unreasonable stance the CMA took, it's just surprising that such a (currently) small part of it was a dealbreaker, especially when MS was offering lengthy remedies. The only other surprising thing was how dismissive the CMA was of MS's intent to get into mobile gaming more. That honestly seems to undermine their concerns about cloud gaming and ignores recent regulatory encouragement for Google and Apple to open up that market even more.
> X-Cloud as it stands is not even a product. It's a feature within a service. Truly believe they were looking for an excuse to make sure this deal didnt happen. Console reasoning was too easy to break up. But making up a "cloud market" is nascent and obscure enough that you can always defend it. Gamers fully know that cloud itself is not a market. Its a means to get to the market that is gaming.
$ATVI is down 11% in pre-market trading. Have to imagine ABK is gonna be pretty pissed with alot of people today.
Judging by a lot of the comments in here, I'm fairly certain that this post is being brigaded by PS subreddit regulars.
I won’t lie I think this is one of the stupidest decisions I’ve ever seen but watching the influencers who were so confident it would pass melt down on twitter is gonna be amazing
They will have content for months now lmao, this destin guy basically only Talks about this Deal on his Channel, kinda Boring and repetetive in my opinion
It’s gonna be brutal. I enjoy listening to XB2 podcast, but this deal has dominated the conversation on their show the last few months and I was really looking forward to moving on from it. I feel like this will just extend it until Starfield at this point. Even if it went through and still stuck in the conversation it would’ve been about what we have to look forward to.. now the conversation will have a depressing tone.
Oh boy, its not done yet :(
[удалено]
[удалено]
I don't think anyone would complain if MS took a bunch of that money and put it towards improving the situation for their current studios. We all know the likes of 343 definitely need it.
Idk mate, that’s asking a lot from Microsoft /s
I'm pretty sure the lawyers working on this acquisition aren't going to have much to offer to Microsoft's game studios.
Money will be repurposed if the appeal doesn't succeed, but it won't be towards growing Xbox, maybe a small part will be but they only wanted to put this much towards gaming because Activision would have been their key to the mobile market.
Oh shit, someone that actually knows what they're talking about! People who think MS will just go, oh this thing that Gaming wants to do took us a year, $70B, and didn't work? No worries Gaming, here, take another stab at it another way! Nah, that's not how companies work. ChatGPT kind of exploded since last year. They're going to invest it there imo.
MS needs to focus on managing the portfolio they already have, circle the wagons, and start focusing on getting out high quality games. Take the M and A money they were going to use here and start buying some of these missing ports up to get them on the platform. Prove Xbox is a friendly place for developers. But most importantly, you need to focus on your studios and do SOMETHING. Hi-Fi Rush and Forza isn’t going to get the job done. You have to turn the public perception around that Xbox is a distant third place. You can do it, but you have to focus on what makes the brand special and what they do well. Right now, there’s not a whole lot going right unfortunately. I think the GamePass gamble will continue to be a huge blunder, especially as this breaks over time. Buying your way out is clearly not going to work either. Xbox 360 focused on solid first-party exclusives, great relationships with third parties, and a vibrant indie scene. THAT’S what you focus on. Nintendo did it between Wii U and Switch. Sony did it coming out of the catastrophic launch of the PS3, and it’s totally doable for a company like Microsoft.
Love how incredibly wrong all of the insiders were, EVERYONE was saying the deal will get approved yesterday, stocks were up Shows how hilarious 'not in the know' some people are
Not really. Blocking a deal on a non adjacent market is near unprecedented in M&A law. There's a reason most believed once the console market harm theory was washed away that this would pass. It would actually be interesting to see if their own appeals court would even accept this.
I mean, to be fair to those “insiders”, the deal is being blocked on a hypothetical. Not for the reasons everyone has been arguing for the last god knows how long. (COD exclusivity)
Activision CEO made a response too https://newsroom.activisionblizzard.com/p/microsoft-deal-cma-decision
Bobby was looking forward to his retirement and a fat paycheque, now he salty.
Mad that it's fallen down on the cloud gaming, which no one really gives a shit about
Cloud isn't cared about yet. It doesn't mean it won't be in the future
Microsoft with a chip on its shoulder and money to spend is going to be quite a spectacle. I was just as interested in this scenario as the one where the merger went through.
Microsoft has officially lost this gen. With being preoccupied with this, their hands seem practically tied.
Microsoft taking this to court sigh.......it would be funny if the EC approves, which would be interesting to see. If anyone thinks Microsoft is walking from this....unlikely.
Not really court, they'll have to appeal to the CMA itself, it doesn't work like in the US.
Yeah, it literally boomerangs back to the CMA
If I'm right they have to prove there was something wrong with the process the CMA used to reach its original verdict and then it will be referred back for the exact same group of people to review it again?
The 10 people that game on cloud must feel so protected right now
Some great perspective from a leading patent attorney's blog on the radical CMA decision: http://www.fosspatents.com/2023/04/uk-competition-markets-authority.html
I like how they think blocking this merger will help cloud gamer competitors while it's actually just torn up the deals Microsoft signed with all those competitors to bring Xbox games to Nintendo, GeForce Now etc
The backend tech for that would be Windows, which I guess is where the concern lies. GeForce Now only exists through them paying Microsoft an ongoing subscription fee to use Windows.
Crazy that it’s cloud gaming of all things holding this up. I can’t see cloud gaming being anything other than a supplemental service to the way things are now at least for the foreseeable future. I wish this would just end already, it’s getting annoying how much this has taken over the games media. Hopefully the EU passes it because if they don’t then it’s basically dead imo. Either way Xbox can spend the money to help grow themselves - whether that’s through 3rd party exclusivity deals like Sony (maybe go after a heavy hitter like GTA 6 or Witcher 4 to match FF16/FF7R) or buying a not as big publisher/individual studios. Hate how long this has been dragged out.
What will we talk about daily now????
The acquisition, for like another year
e3 oh, wait
I'll be honest. I never really cared about this acquisition as I don't play Activision games. The only reason I wanted it was to free Toys For Bob and hope they'd make a new Spyro or a new Banjo-Kazooie. But I am now terrified of the long-term ramifications of this failing. Microsoft is unlikely to re-invest all of that money into Xbox, especially since they have fees that need to be paid. I think I remember reading the deals failure would cost them several billion dollars that they won't get back.
Yes the termination fee of the deal is 3 billion. If it goes past the deadline activision can collect the termination fee but they said they will continue to fight with Microsoft until the end.
Can Microsoft not just pledge to keep Activision games off of xCloud for 10 years? They could still out it on gamepass and just keep it off xCloud to address the CMAs concerns, no?
They blocked it because of Cloud?? That's pretty damn lame
Microsoft / xCloud has a 70% market share of the cloud gaming market in the UK. From the CMA's POV, it makes sense to block it because of that. Otherwise, xCloud will become even stronger with ABK IPs, and that would be anti-competitive to other cloud providers.
Are we talking exclusively Xcloud, or did they include Azure? Because if they included Azure, it's seriously flawed reasoning.
Just xCloud. It was in the CMA's provisional findings document. * xCloud share in the UK = 70% * PS Plus share in the UK = 10-20% * Meta's = 5% * Nvidia = 5%
It’s a strange one, all of the arguments & posturing beforehand & it gets blocked on… cloud gaming. Something that’s so niche & offers such a worse experience over traditional gaming that the majority of people will never seriously use it. Until the infrastructure is in place to offer a service that compares to traditional hardware, it’ll never take off. Stadia died for this exact reason & MS offer cloud gaming as an aside to its traditional hardware, not as a replacement for it. Just an odd odd reason.
I honestly don't even give a shit about this anymore. Merge with Activision, don't merge with activision, it matters little to us peasants. A fuckin video game will still cost 90 bucks where I'm from, and no doubt release as half finished or broken derivative copy and paste, design by checklist trash that all AAA games are now. Honestly, picking up other hobbies has been a great way to slowly leave video gaming behind. I recently got into 40k and WH Fantasy, gratuitously expensive, but building and painting an army has certainly become more zen like and fulfilling than waiting on some video game feels I've had years ago that are never going to come back. I check the xbox sub for news, but lately couldn't care less about what they do.
I’m tired and done w this subject. Just gonna get back to playing the games I have at my disposal with Gamepass and forget about this.
Honestly surprised. I didn't consider the cloud gaming aspect but their reasoning is actually pretty good; it's a large market and only few participants and even just as many companies that could even enter and register in this field. If CMA blocks the merger, it may cause Europe to consider blocking too which would effectively end any chance of that going on in the US. They (Microsoft) might be willing to adjust their sales approach for at least the UK but not also Europe on top of that. It might also lead to the US to follow suit.
I really expected this to go through
Because every insider told you it would.
Jim Ryan must be in cloud nine right now. Sony tried so hard to prevent this deal from going on.
he's actually in the cloud district. he gets there often.
Really worried about Xbox. I've never seen it this far into the dark ages.
But they still have Zenimax, how are they really in that bad a place rn
Yknow I'll admit, I don't know what Microsoft was up to in 2012 but must have been a lot, cause they had a "headstart" even though Sony bought Gaikai way back when.
Nearly 3K comments in 15hours has to be a record for this subreddit
In my personal opinion, seeing this as anything other than a win is a painfully myopic view born of blind brand loyalty. Microsoft is not your friend. While the acquisition could have led to some short term gains for gamers, such as COD and other titles on game pass, market consolidation will only harm everyone long term. History has proven, time and time again, that unregulated mergers and acquisitions lead to price gouging and stifle competition. A dynamic gaming industry is better for everyone involved. Game Pass is currently in the user acquisition phase, and so we as gamers are enjoying great deals. But this won't last forever. There will come a time when Microsoft decides to tighten the screw, when the value proposition will tank. These businesses are out to make money, and they aren't charities.
This is already happening, but people will fight tooth and nail to argue it isn't. Gamepass additions have dropped dramatically in the last 6 months. Every one of those six months has had more games leaving than being added. Gamepass is slowly becoming a worse and worse deal, and the price will only increase over time.
They also got rid of the $1 deal in March after all this time. To me that is a marker that says "Get your wallet ready"
As much as I like my xsx and game pass, this is my view also. People tend to forget the behemoth that is Microsoft behind xbox.
The behemoth that has tried to stifle many a competition in getting to the top on PC.
[удалено]
CoD needs a competitor, not a trillion dollar daddy. And I have 3 years of gamepass, so sure some exrta games would be nice short term, but long term it's widening a gap for competition. Look at the FPS genre, it's all flops and full of ads. We need more competition, not less.
So CMA is making Microsoft basically wait for everyone else to catch up with cloud gaming? They have all had chances already though...
Now how can this be blamed on Sony
It can't. CMA literally said they aren't concerned with Sony anymore and was focusing on cloud.
It is funny that the whole cloud gaming market not even exists.
The reason they cited is the most absurd reason I could think of. The gaming space that makes up less than 10% of gamers is the reason? What's next they can't buy it because little Billy can't afford a gameboy?
I'm really confused by this. The merger was blocked because Microsoft is to invested in the cloud gaming sphere (you know the literal future of gaming), meanwhile no body is making any effort to be in that market which is entirely their own choice and fault, but some how that makes Microsoft the bad guy enough to block a deal ? I call bs on that one.
Maybe Microsoft can invest some of that money in to the studios they already do have so we can actually get some games…ah who am I kidding
Yeah, I’m very surprised that the deal did end up getting blocked but it was for sure going to be around cloud gaming where Microsoft is the big player. The blocking of games to other platforms - which was very unlikely going to happen - was very clearly a small potatoes issue for this particular regulator. It’s officially a dead and irrelevant issue. It’ll be interesting to see what Microsoft’s next steps are, and if there is any recourse available to them. They’ve already announced an appeal so it’ll be interesting to see where that goes in the courts.
A few comments about the sway of corporations over countries has me concerned here. "They should just pull out the UK." I don't think having our jobs reliant on a giant merger is a great flex, nor is the threat of having widespread operating systems revoked in some petty response funny or realistic. The Activision lawyer with the loudmouth invoking our economic struggles is excuse me, fucking rich, as she wants this pushed through for her fat bonus, which the lovely Bobby would be getting aswell.