there is zero chance that the mergers going to get blocked, Microsoft has the push to get what it wants demonstrably.
This, and the endless and rapid conglomeration of industries in the west over the past 20 years have really shown how toothless western regulatory institutions are. The companies run the show, not the people.
The railroad mergers in particular. CPKC as a perfect example, and now CN is trying to acquire another railroad. Railroads used to be hundreds of different companies, now it’s five large corporations and a few tiny struggling small railroads. And those small railroads almost always end up being bought by Genessee & Wyoming, a holding company that homogenizes them under one banner. Deregulating and privatizing the railroads was a horrible mistake.
The merger will bring more shitty behavior I GUARANTEE IT.
Anyone play MW2 or MW3? They are extreme pieces of garbage. Not sellable. They put that trash out anyway. That would be a massive class action lawsuit if the players weren’t weak degenerates. The fact that they buy garbage shouldn’t be an argument for putting more trash out.
It’s so bad. So so so bad.
See, normally I would agree with you, but Activision/Blizzard was so uniquely terrible that it literally cannot get worse.
I think of it this way. I never have to spend money on another one of those shitty games in my life.
Call of Duty has been truly ass well before these new hot steaming piles.
The serious gamer market isn’t the target audience for CoD. They’re aiming for kids and the adults who play 20 minutes a day and call it good. The game is perfectly fine for those players. Anyone who wants to play at anything more than a couch casual level isn’t the audience the game is made for. Do I think they’re terrible games? Yes, but that doesn’t mean they’re not filling the exact market niche they’re aiming for.
I can’t believe anyone would approve it to begin with… but then again maybe some bribery was involved.
Honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised if it has more to do with “if we hold this one up, what does it say about all these other mergers that we let through that are more egregious?”
Oof what a painfully terrible precedent if true.
I can’t believe anyone would approve it to begin with…
The main reason it didn’t face as much resistance is how far behind Sony (and IMO Nintendo) Microsoft is in this console generation. And the merger was still really close to not happening at all despite there being no chance that it turns MS into anything resembling a monopoly.
And since AB isn’t really a platform in the same way Microsoft/Sony/Nintendo are it’s not as though it’s directly reducing competition in that market.
And blocking the merger also benefits the market leader in the space.
And MS is a US company, while Sony isn’t (which matters in the context of the FTC).
Ok, interesting points.
I would still like to see a damper on companies buying their way into market dominance. I hate the way Meta bought Oculus and all those game devs and just blew money on device subsidies to get to where they are now. The market leader… owner… of vr.
Xbox, at least, is a 20+ year old brand.
I just wish they could recapture the magic of the older Xbox systems. Especially the original felt more like a PC. I think they could dominate in that market, especially with Windows installed on it.
I think it would be wise for Microsoft to jump into the console PC hybrid before Valve does.
Maybe…lol
What a line drawn over what kind of merger is a step too far. Food and agriculture? Medicine? Chemicals and science?
Nah, Call of Duty being console exclusive.
The FTC is also opposing the kroger/albertsons merger, healthcare office mergers under private equity, along with sueing google and and amazon, and more.
They literally are currently opposing mergers in all of the above and trying to break up current monopolies.
Until the next administration just rubber stamps everything, and then it’s too late because – reasons.
That’s a flaw with our government, not the efforts of our current FTC.
What tautological shit does that mean? The FTC is literally the government.
This FTC, in the current administration, is doing good work. If its forced not to do good work in a new administration, it is not the fault of the FTC itself.
Lambast our system of goverment all you like. Its certainly earned it. It does not make the FTC, who is hard at work, somehow at fault.
It doesn’t matter if it’s essential or not. Microsoft literally already got smacked for monopoly issues 20 years ago without being essential.
The UK initially held this up but then relented. Does anyone know why?
Officially one of biggest concerns was with the cloud gaming market monopoly as they could have all of Activision titles on Game Pass so Microsoft conceded that thier Activision cloud game rights would be given to Ubisoft.
$
*£
Microsoft was willing to leave the UK market as its not big enough compared to the value the aquisition would be valued.
The UK argued for Microsofts cloud gaming dominamce. To appease thr CMA, microsoft gave ubisoft all streaming rights to act/blizz games for like a ridiculously long timr.
A. The U.S. relented. The UK was never a massive player in this deal, they were just one of the first to loudly dissent. While the U.S. was blocking the deal, they were able to easily point to the FTC and sit on their hands. They caved pretty soon after.
B. Microsoft made some promises. Ubisoft is going to get game streaming rights, which means if Microsoft wants to make any of their games available on Game Pass, Ubisoft has to agree and Microsoft will have to pay Ubi for the privilege.
…Isn’t this a little late?
I don’t really think this is going to mean anything after they got through the UK litigation.
It’s an appeal
