Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 490 posts

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#51

Post by ramesh31 »

FreshStart wrote: post #33
ramesh31 wrote: post #27

This is a very good thing for gamers. It reminds me of the Sprint/T-mobile merger, which was a huge win for consumers, allowing T-mobile to actually put pressure on ATT and Verizon. Activision is a terrible company whose iron grip on their beloved IP (bought from Blizzard and Infinity Ward) has been absolutely stifling to the industry. They are almost singlehandedly responsible for everything that sucks about gaming…

Yeah, this will end with engineering spirit penetrating McdonaldDouglas.

>Yeah, this will end with engineering spirit penetrating McdonaldDouglas.

It's more like if MD had bought Boeing. One can only dream.

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#52

Post by xxpor »

darknavi wrote: post #42
xxpor wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be incredibly stupid for MS to make CoD an xbox exclusive and completely misses the business case for buying Activision in the first place. Remember, MS is in business to make money , not to win the console wars. Buying the CoD (etc) IP at an inflated price and then immediately cutting off more than half of the revenue would be so mind-boggingly stupid, almost to the point of malpractice. This is why they re…

I totally agree. Xbox in the past 5-10 years really has been "Play our games where ever, just give us your money". I just don't really get the argument of "We won't do this for 10 years". OK, what about after that?

I don't know. I doubt MS, Sony, or the FTC know either. They probably have an idea, but who's to say if it right or wrong? It's really hard to predict markets out that far.

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#53

Post by coldpie »

abduhl wrote: post #41
vinyl7 wrote: post #3

The monopolization of every industry continues

[flagged]

> Lina Khan and the FTC have been brazenly bought and sold by a foreign company and weaponized against US consumers

Speaking of spreading misinformation, do you have anything to back that claim up?

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#55

Post by abduhl »

NoRelToEmber wrote: post #50
abduhl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> It’s already monopolized by Sony. You say that as if it means that this acquisition then isn't monopolization. The solution is to sanction Sony, not to make things even worse .

The evidence presented at trial showed that this vertical (not horizontal) acquisition would increase competition in the market. If antitrust laws were based on the conception of monopolization you seem to be suggesting then any acquisition or merger would be a monopolist’s act, and that’s ridiculous.

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#56

Post by robertlagrant »

lesuorac wrote: post #4
darknavi wrote: post #2

Microsoft employee here, opinions my own. I work in gaming at Microsoft and I really enjoy it. I think Microsoft gives us a ton of space to explore and make our own impact and I am a huge fan* of Phil Spencer. > Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision has been described as the largest in tech history. It deserves scrutiny. That scrutiny has paid off: Microsoft has committed in writing, in public, and in court to keep C…

> How does this make anyone feel any better? What happens after 10 years? What happens in less than 10 years if they don't abide by it? Does Activision get split back out? I doubt it. We're long past the point where you can just set rules/laws and companies will abide by it. We need to be at the point where we also list the punishment ahead of time.

> We're long past the point where you can just set rules/laws and companies will abide by it.

We're not, but this is pretty nebulous stuff. The state blocking freely agreed transactions because it can foresee some damage is not exactly a clear cut good, other than for people who are reassured by the idea of the state as a benevolent, all-knowing mom and pop, and for the lawyers who get paid a fortune to debate past and future hypotheticals.

What about this: allow the merger, and if the harm is done, the company must pay, but if the harm is not done, the state must pay?

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#58

Post by anthk »

Now Zork belongs to MS. Release it under MIT and everyone would win a great history of gaming (and the right to create new histories in the Zorkverse without worrying). Spiritwrak it's a good example. In case of anyone says "text adventures have no future"... the folk lore from a distant past made Disney rich. The Arturian legends plus some samurai touches set into a futuristic space made George Lucas and Lucasfilms loaded, too.

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#59

Post by paulryanrogers »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #17
MikusR wrote: post #8

A snippet from the case "FTC: We've heard about the harms to Sony... Judge: This is about the harms to the consumer not to Sony. Let's take a break until 4:05."

FTC: Wait what?! We're supposed to be concerned about the rabble first?

Europe considers both direct harm to consumers and harm to competitors because without significant competition, the big players inevitably slide into exploiting customers and their vendors.

Re: Microsoft wins FTC fight to buy Activision Blizzard

#60

Post by abduhl »

coldpie wrote: post #53
abduhl wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Lina Khan and the FTC have been brazenly bought and sold by a foreign company and weaponized against US consumers Speaking of spreading misinformation, do you have anything to back that claim up?

Sure: you can see it by reviewing the filings by the FTC in the case FTC v. Microsoft Corp. at https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/67494594/federal-trade-...

Pay special attention to the theories of harm advanced by the FTC and note that the harm focused on by the FTC is that done to a foreign company (Sony) rather than US consumers.

Post reply on HN