The Federal Trade Commission’s request for an injunction stopping that acquisition heads toward opening arguments this week, the federal regulator cites one piece of what it calls “powerful evidence” that it can’t trust Microsoft’s assurances. In short, as the FTC puts it, “Microsoft’s actions following its 2021 acquisition of ZeniMax speak louder than Defendants’ words.”

  • thoro@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m very happy that these agencies are blocking this acquisition. I had no faith they would.

    There’s nothing good about the fourth largest video game publisher (third for first parties) acquiring the sixth largest (third for third parties). We need more variety, not more consolidation.

    • Jinxyface@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      It pains me to see so many people praise the acquisition ofr Microsoft to become “competitive” again.

      Bro Microsoft is a trillion+ dollar company. They can spend their own fucking money making studios. If they can’t, that’s their problem. Letting them swallow up long time multi platform studios just to make their long running multi platform games Xbox exclusive is not the answer to that problem.

  • Gamingdexter@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    As a mainly Xbox gamer, that sucks, but understandable. Microsoft has tons of money and Xbox has bought up several studios and let them do small or not great games. I think the ZeniMax buyout sucks for PlayStation owners, but here I am waiting on playing FF and other games (which some eventually came out years later). If it’s 3rd party, I don’t think they (PS/Xbox) should be able to hold a game for longer than a year. StarField is an Xbox and PC release, that is the difference for me. If PS games released along side PC releases, I’d me more inclined to say it’s fine. We’ll see how it goes, I’m hoping that StarField will be great and M$ will notice and start investing more money and time into exclusives. Time will tell

  • dan_the_accountant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Interesting. I’m against large companies buying up all these developers, but it seems strange that this is where they’re trying to draw the line.

    • UrbenLegend@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, exclusives have been a part of the console business model since their inception, so it is odd that they’re just starting to look into this business practice now. Still, exclusives do need to die, so better late than never, I say.

      • conciselyverbose@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The difference is buying a massive multi platform developer and taking their future production away from the other platform.

        Microsoft not publishing Gears of War or Sony not publishing Uncharted on the other platform are adding choice, because those games would have probably never existed without their investment. Microsoft buying Bethesda is taking choice away, because Bethesda was already a big publisher already making games and already had the processes for multiple platforms. They’re not suddenly doing the hyper optimization Sony gets out of their funded platform exclusive developers, either. They’re using the engine they already had that’s already designed to support a bunch of platforms and just not supporting one for the sole purpose of that platform not having it.

        • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Bear in mind that Bethesda/Zenimax weren’t in the best shape when MS brought them. They were increasingly focussing on GASS and love service titles after a string of critically loved but low selling titles like Prey. They were taking bags for Sony for times exclusivity on every title and were in talks to do so with Starfield too. We’ve just seen Bethesda be allowed a whole extra year on SF to polish under MS, where as if they were still independent we may have got a multi format but it would have been rushed out buggy and unfinished by Zenimax last year.

      • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Exclusives are what built the console model we have today though. Nintendo with their still loved franchises like Mario, Metroid, Zelda, etc all began as exclusives to drive NES sales. Sega, Sony, Atari, etc, they’ve all had exclusives. People only seem to have taken an issue with it in the last decade or so.

      • xradeon@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think it’s necessarily that they’re drawing some kind of line on exclusives now. The issue is that Microsoft has pinky promised that if they buy Activision, that CoD at least (most likely other games as well) will NOT be Xbox exclusives. So that’s why Microsoft’s purchase of ZeniMax and then releasing a Xbox exclusive out of the deal shows that Microsoft’s pinky promise for Activision might not be as good as it seems.

        Honestly, I hope the deal gets blocked. I am a slight Microsoft fan boy (and I really loved all of the ree’ing from PlayStation fan boys when it was first announced), but I really hate all of this buying and consolidation of companies, it really needs to stop. Let companies compete with each other.

        • UrbenLegend@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          So that’s why Microsoft’s purchase of ZeniMax and then releasing a Xbox exclusive out of the deal

          Did they ever promise that ZeniMax games would not be exclusive? If so, then yeah, that’s pretty shitty.

          but I really hate all of this buying and consolidation of companies, it really needs to stop.

          Hear, hear!

          • Kettellkorn@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m pretty sure they were super vague and shady with the language they were using when talking about that.

  • iamlyth@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    All this really does is seem to encourage the way Sony does business which is to just buy exclusivity agreements with third party studios. Both methods (buying established studios outright and buying exclusivity agreements) seem highly anticompetitive and bad for gamers overall.

    • thoro@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Or they could nurture growing studios and develop new IP under their own management?

      • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        So could Sony, instead of locking down stuff like Final Fantasy. They had plenty of developers in Japan to work on a JRPG, but they downsized those studios to focus on their big AAA western Devs.

        • thoro@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          This is about Microsoft’s options to build a better quality library, not a defense of Sony’s timed exclusivity practices (practices which Xbox also used when on top during the 360 era).

          Still, Sony did nurture the studios they acquired and developed quality titles through those studios that pushed them ahead and gave them the reputation of having a “prestige” library. Even recently, Returnal is an example of such nurturing.

          Nothing prevented Microsoft from competing except their own poor management decisions to milk franchises dry from the 360 era without adequate quality controls and a general incompetence at developing a comparably prestigious library since that generation.

          Microsoft being blocked from throwing their much larger bags of money at acquiring one of the biggest publishers in the industry does not mean their only option is to do timed exclusivity deals.

    • NuPNuA@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      If this deal does end up getting blocked, I can see MS taking their bag and money hatting any third party game that isn’t locked down yet as a timed or permanent exclusive. If it’s fine for Sony to do things that way, why not MS?

    • ram@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If we actually want to solve that problem though, the solution isn’t to just stop the purchase and call it a day. And I doubt the FTC is going to lobby legislators to actually do their jobs.