Octopus Overlords

Zaxxon wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:07 pm
I spot multiple metaverse references,

absurd comments on ActiBlizz's commitment to an amazing workplace--which will, ahem, evolve into an exemplary workplace come deal close--and some bonus user-generated content shout-outs.

Montag wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:04 pm Do we get a new Myth game?

Skinypupy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:02 pm

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:49 pm As such, I strongly suspect this was mainly an IP buy. I seriously doubt they want to keep the company around with the problems they've been having. They'll shutter them and move everyone internally, perhaps get many of them working at other studios MS have bought recently, like say, Obsidian or Bethesda. I see the IPs moving around, with COD and Destiny going to some of their FPS devs (Yay more FPSes from MS ), Warcraft and Diablo going to Obsidian and Bethesda. In fact, new blood might be a good thing with some of these IPs. For instance, could anyone imagine an isometric Obsidian-style Warcraft RPG? These IPs have stayed fairly stagnant for a while now and new blood might bring about inspiration on moving forward with them with new games.

That's a pretty interesting idea. While still top of the heap in playerbase (I think), WoW is obviously stagnating and was seeing a pretty significant exodus over the past year. Partly due to the game itself and partly due to Blizzard's overall shittiness.

It would be a good excuse and opportunity to refresh some of these cool IP's that have a ton of potential that have mostly clunked over the past little while.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:04 pm I don't know. Most people don't think that deeply. The impression will be that Bad Blizzard is gone and Microsoft's Blizzard has taken its place, and most of the bad reputation will fade.

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 9:22 pm Their only property on console that I know of is Diablo with Diablo 3, and unless they bring WoW to consoles (could they?),

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 10:32 pm

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 9:22 pm Their only property on console that I know of is Diablo with Diablo 3, and unless they bring WoW to consoles (could they?),

Overwatch is on consoles, and Hearthstone is still pretty popular on mobile. And Overwatch 2 isn't too far away.

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:49 pm As such, I strongly suspect this was mainly an IP buy. I seriously doubt they want to keep the company around with the problems they've been having. They'll shutter them and move everyone internally, perhaps get many of them working at other studios MS have bought recently, like say, Obsidian or Bethesda. I see the IPs moving around, with COD and Destiny going to some of their FPS devs (Yay more FPSes from MS ), Warcraft and Diablo going to Obsidian and Bethesda. In fact, new blood might be a good thing with some of these IPs. For instance, could anyone imagine an isometric Obsidian-style Warcraft RPG? These IPs have stayed fairly stagnant for a while now and new blood might bring about inspiration on moving forward with them with new games.

Grifman wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 1:23 am

Rumpy wrote: ↑Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:49 pm As such, I strongly suspect this was mainly an IP buy. I seriously doubt they want to keep the company around with the problems they've been having. They'll shutter them and move everyone internally, perhaps get many of them working at other studios MS have bought recently, like say, Obsidian or Bethesda. I see the IPs moving around, with COD and Destiny going to some of their FPS devs (Yay more FPSes from MS ), Warcraft and Diablo going to Obsidian and Bethesda. In fact, new blood might be a good thing with some of these IPs. For instance, could anyone imagine an isometric Obsidian-style Warcraft RPG? These IPs have stayed fairly stagnant for a while now and new blood might bring about inspiration on moving forward with them with new games.

No offense but I think this is insane. All those studios have all of their own IP to do, much less take over currently developed IP from Activision. Now I can see some extensions to current IP perhaps being worked on by other, but the idea that WOW, Diablo, or CoD are moving to existing studios is crazy. Even so, MS so far has shown no desire to shift IP between existing studios so far so the jury is out as to whether that will ever happen.

Rumpy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 2:48 am Sure, ordinarily I'd agree with you, but I think with how badly tainted Activision Blizzard is at this point, these are not normal circumstances.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:49 amI think you're underestimating how much 1) most people don't care (just a vocal minority),

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:49 am

Rumpy wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 2:48 am Sure, ordinarily I'd agree with you, but I think with how badly tainted Activision Blizzard is at this point, these are not normal circumstances.

I think you're underestimating how much 1) most people don't care (just a vocal minority), and 2) people are going to see that this is a 'reboot' of ActiBlizz, removing much of the negativity associated with their image.

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:49 am And don't forget, Microsoft now owns MLG (Major League Gaming), which is a significant coup for them as well, plus they could easily turn mlg.tv into a Twitch competitor.

Max Peck wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 4:47 pm

Blackhawk wrote: ↑Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:49 am And don't forget, Microsoft now owns MLG (Major League Gaming), which is a significant coup for them as well, plus they could easily turn mlg.tv into a Twitch competitor.

They've already tried competing with Twitch. If mlg.tv isn't already a Twitch-beater, I don't see why MS would want to go down that road again.

Activision-Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick will walk away with a $390 million check as a result of Microsoft’s acquisition of his gaming company — just two months after employees demanded his firing over the firm’s alleged culture of sexual misconduct.

Daehawk wrote: ↑Thu Jan 20, 2022 12:20 pm Embattled Activision-Blizzard CEO to get $390M payout in Microsoft deal

Activision-Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick will walk away with a $390 million check as a result of Microsoft’s acquisition of his gaming company — just two months after employees demanded his firing over the firm’s alleged culture of sexual misconduct.

The vast majority of his $390 million payout will come from the 3.95 million shares that he owns, according to securities filings.

Since Kotick doesn’t own any unvested equities, he will not be entitled to a change of control payment.

Federal prosecutors and securities regulators are investigating large bets that Barry Diller, Alexander von Furstenberg and David Geffen made on Activision Blizzard Inc. shares in January, days before the videogame maker agreed to be acquired by Microsoft Corp. MSFT 4.59% , according to people familiar with the matter.

The three men have an unrealized profit of about $60 million on the options trade, based on the recent Activision share price of around $80, according to the people.

Daehawk wrote: ↑Wed Mar 09, 2022 5:51 pm Uh oh...snag

U.S. Probes Trade by Barry Diller, David Geffen Before Big Merger

Federal prosecutors and securities regulators are investigating large bets that Barry Diller, Alexander von Furstenberg and David Geffen made on Activision Blizzard Inc. shares in January, days before the videogame maker agreed to be acquired by Microsoft Corp. MSFT 4.59% , according to people familiar with the matter.

The three men have an unrealized profit of about $60 million on the options trade, based on the recent Activision share price of around $80, according to the people.

And, if we had any such information we would never have traded on it – it strains credulity to believe we would have done so three days before Microsoft and Activision made their announcement.

LawBeefaroni wrote: ↑Wed Mar 09, 2022 9:09 pm

Daehawk wrote: ↑Wed Mar 09, 2022 5:51 pm Uh oh...snag

U.S. Probes Trade by Barry Diller, David Geffen Before Big Merger

Federal prosecutors and securities regulators are investigating large bets that Barry Diller, Alexander von Furstenberg and David Geffen made on Activision Blizzard Inc. shares in January, days before the videogame maker agreed to be acquired by Microsoft Corp. MSFT 4.59% , according to people familiar with the matter.

The three men have an unrealized profit of about $60 million on the options trade, based on the recent Activision share price of around $80, according to the people.

It won't affect the MSFT purchase of ATVI. The most that will happen is Geffen, Diller, and his step son will pay a few $M fine, admit no wrongdoing, and pocket over $50M. But most likely nothing will happen.

And, if we had any such information we would never have traded on it – it strains credulity to believe we would have done so three days before Microsoft and Activision made their announcement.

Translation: you don't have shit.

UK regulators reviewing Microsoft's proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard reversed their stance on a key question today, saying they no longer believe Microsoft would remove the Call of Duty franchise from Sony's PlayStation consoles.

Last month, the UK Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) tentatively concluded that a combined Microsoft/Activision Blizzard would harm competition in console gaming. At the time, the CMA said evidence showed that "Microsoft would find it commercially beneficial to make Activision's games exclusive to its own consoles (or only available on PlayStation under materially worse conditions)." The agency also raised concerns about the merger affecting rivals in cloud gaming.

The preliminary finding was a victory for Sony, which has consistently expressed doubts about Microsoft's promise to keep putting Call of Duty games on PlayStation. But Microsoft argued that the CMA's financial model was flawed and was able to convince the agency to reverse its conclusion. In an announcement today, the CMA said it "received a significant amount of new evidence."

"Having considered the additional evidence provided, we have now provisionally concluded that the merger will not result in a substantial lessening of competition in console gaming services because the cost to Microsoft of withholding Call of Duty from PlayStation would outweigh any gains from taking such action," CMA Panel Chair Martin Coleman said.

As a result, the CMA panel investigating the deal "updated its provisional findings and reached the provisional conclusion that, overall, the transaction will not result in a substantial lessening of competition in relation to console gaming in the UK," the agency announcement said.

U.K. regulators blocked the largest deal in Microsoft’s history Wednesday, barring its $69 billion purchase of gaming company Activision Blizzard in a signal of the mounting global scrutiny of large American tech companies’ power.

The U.K. competition authority ruled that the combination would give Microsoft too much power in the fast-growing cloud-based video games market. Microsoft already owns the popular gaming console Xbox, and the deal would give it control of some of the most popular game franchises including Call of Duty, World of Warcraft, Overwatch and Candy Crush.

Microsoft already accounts for an estimated 60 to 70 percent of global cloud gaming services, and it has other advantages because of its existing Xbox business and cloud computing services, the U.K. regulator concluded.

The European Commission will reportedly approve Microsoft’s $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard next week.

That’s according to Reuters sources, who claim May 15 is the likeliest date that EU antitrust regulators will announce the decision.

The European Commission has confirmed plans to publish its verdict by May 22, and it has previously been claimed that Microsoft’s willingness to offer game licensing deals to rivals is likely to address its antitrust concerns.

gilraen wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2023 5:57 pm Microsoft could geofence Activision games and just keep them off the Game Pass service in the UK. At the end, UK consumers would be the losers in the deal.

gilraen wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2023 5:57 pm Microsoft could geofence Activision games and just keep them off the Game Pass service in the UK. At the end, UK consumers would be the losers in the deal.

Hrothgar wrote: ↑Thu May 11, 2023 11:01 pm

gilraen wrote: ↑Wed May 10, 2023 5:57 pm Microsoft could geofence Activision games and just keep them off the Game Pass service in the UK. At the end, UK consumers would be the losers in the deal.

That seems like a technical solution to a legal problem. IANAL, but I don't think you can continue doing business in a country where you ignore their laws. I'm not sure Microsoft is willing to give up all its interests in the UK for the sake of this purchase.

A federal judge has handed Microsoft a major victory by declining to block its looming $69 billion takeover of video game company Activision Blizzard. Regulators are seeking to ax the deal because they say it will hurt competition.

U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley said in a ruling that the “FTC has not shown a likelihood it will prevail on its claim this particular vertical merger in this specific industry may substantially lessen competition. To the contrary, the record evidence points to more consumer access to Call of Duty and other Activision content.”

Microsoft appeared to have the upper hand in a 5-day San Francisco court hearing that ended late last month. The proceeding showcased testimony by Microsoft Chief Executive Officer Satya Nadella and longtime Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick, who both pledged to keep Activision’s blockbuster game Call of Duty available to people who play it on consoles — particularly Sony’s PlayStation — that compete with Microsoft’s Xbox.

Max Peck wrote: ↑Tue Jul 11, 2023 11:42 am Judge declines to block Microsoft’s record $69 billion deal to buy Activision Blizzard

A federal judge has handed Microsoft a major victory by declining to block its looming $69 billion takeover of video game company Activision Blizzard. Regulators are seeking to ax the deal because they say it will hurt competition.

U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley said in a ruling that the “FTC has not shown a likelihood it will prevail on its claim this particular vertical merger in this specific industry may substantially lessen competition. To the contrary, the record evidence points to more consumer access to Call of Duty and other Activision content.”

Microsoft appeared to have the upper hand in a 5-day San Francisco court hearing that ended late last month. The proceeding showcased testimony by Microsoft Chief Executive Officer Satya Nadella and longtime Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick, who both pledged to keep Activision’s blockbuster game Call of Duty available to people who play it on consoles — particularly Sony’s PlayStation — that compete with Microsoft’s Xbox.

Corley, herself a Biden nominee, expressed skepticism about the FTC’s case during the proceedings, particularly about the hypothetical harms caused if Microsoft were to remove Call of Duty from rival platforms or offer a subpar experience on competing consoles.

“It all comes down again to Call of Duty,” she said. “We’re here because of Call of Duty.”

Corley said the merger deserved scrutiny.

“That scrutiny has paid off: Microsoft has committed in writing, in public, and in court to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation for 10 years on parity with Xbox,” she wrote. “It made an agreement with Nintendo to bring Call of Duty to Switch. And it entered several agreements to for the first time bring Activision’s content to several cloud gaming services.”

As antitrust investigations and legal challenges mounted in the U.S. and around the world, Microsoft pledged that Call of Duty would appear on Nintendo’s Switch console, Nvidia’s cloud gaming service and other platforms for at least a decade.

“In many ways you won,” Corley told the FTC’s lead trial attorney on the case, James Weingarten.

“I don’t think we won,” Weingarten responded, saying there was no evidence that the “hastily agreed to” contracts would sufficiently protect the market.

$iljanus wrote: ↑Tue Jul 11, 2023 12:29 pm

Max Peck wrote: ↑Tue Jul 11, 2023 11:42 am Judge declines to block Microsoft’s record $69 billion deal to buy Activision Blizzard

A federal judge has handed Microsoft a major victory by declining to block its looming $69 billion takeover of video game company Activision Blizzard. Regulators are seeking to ax the deal because they say it will hurt competition.

U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley said in a ruling that the “FTC has not shown a likelihood it will prevail on its claim this particular vertical merger in this specific industry may substantially lessen competition. To the contrary, the record evidence points to more consumer access to Call of Duty and other Activision content.”

Microsoft appeared to have the upper hand in a 5-day San Francisco court hearing that ended late last month. The proceeding showcased testimony by Microsoft Chief Executive Officer Satya Nadella and longtime Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick, who both pledged to keep Activision’s blockbuster game Call of Duty available to people who play it on consoles — particularly Sony’s PlayStation — that compete with Microsoft’s Xbox.

I don't think that they would want to kill the cash cow that is Call of Duty by limiting it to one platform. But "pledges" are great... until the money analysts say that exclusivity would make more cash of course.

In a major restructuring of its long-proposed acquisition plans for Activision Blizzard, Microsoft has announced that the cloud-streaming rights for current and future Activision titles will be controlled by Ubisoft rather than Microsoft itself. The move is an effort to ameliorate concerns from UK regulators who blocked the proposed acquisition in April over potential impacts on competition in the cloud-gaming space.

The newly proposed deal covers perpetual, worldwide streaming rights for all current Activision games and those released in the next 15 years, according to an announcement from Microsoft Vice Chair President Brad Smith. Ubisoft will have exclusive control of those streaming rights outside of the European Union, allowing the company to make those games available on its own Ubisoft+ service and to license them out to other cloud-gaming providers (including Microsoft itself). In the EU, Microsoft will pay to license those Activision streaming rights back from Ubisoft to satisfy promises made to the European Commission regarding free licensing to competing cloud-gaming providers.

In a statement provided to Ars Technica, Ubisoft said the deal would allow Activision titles to be offered via Ubisoft+ Multi Access on PC, Xbox, and Amazon Luna, as well as via Ubisoft+ Classics on PlayStation. "Today’s deal will give players even more opportunities to access and enjoy some of the biggest brands in gaming," said Chris Early, Ubisoft SVP of Strategic Partnerships and Business Development, in the statement.