I agree but I also think Microsoft is more likely to target companies having a harder time. I am not saying Microsoft will only acquire those companies but they feel more likely, which leads to Ubisoft or Square. While Square would be the “break into Japan” jackpot, Ubisoft has a very powerful catalogue, could probably be picked up for a massive steal as their stock has just continued to tank and Ubisoft has a lot of studios and releases a lot of games a year (which is something Microsoft would likely love to fold into gamepass). I think Square is a little more likely for a few reasons like fact it would give Microsoft major power in RPGs as a whole, the fact that some square studios are already working with game studios and how it could open up game pass to the Japanese audience and games being added more often to gamepass, but it is pretty close.
Aside from those though, Capcom would also be a good buy as they are not only decently big in Japan but they have a massive foot worldwide unlike Square and have both veriety and icons of their genres (hell the face in those genres), in terms of Japan or hell maybe even in general I think they are the best pick up but I see them as less likely due to them currently thriving unlike the other 2. Take Two I mainly see Microsoft picking up defensively (like to prevent someone else buying them). Take Two has some of the biggest games in the industry and even has online live service games which probably make a ton of money though microtransactions which are just parts of a game (GTA online and Red Dead Redemtion online). SEGA I see as a good pick up but aside from sonic non of their IPs are that well known worldwide and if Microsoft wanted them to move in on Japan I feel like Square would of been a better buy as they are probably the 2nd most beloved publisher there (nintendo is number 1 obviously) but they would be cheaper most likely and while a lot of their IPs are more niche they do have a lot of veriety
I could see Sony buying someone big but not a T2 or even a Capcom, I see Sony buying KADOKAWA as a possibility or maybe Konami’s IPs but thats all I see as realistic in terms of “big acquisitions”
can’t read it but aside from Facebook, I don’t think the FTC or DOJ is being to critical of any of them. Like their are comments by certain people at times but the only one I activily remember is from amazon who got away from buying MGM without even facing a lawsuit. I think the only reason Facebook is being sued is because social media is infinitely more important now a days than it was a 5-10 years ago as now a days I think its fair to say most people see the news though social media and Facebook can easily manipulate that as a result, even then I feel like facebook will probably not have to split up any major parts of their company but thats just me. Hell they were in some level of discussions to buy Activision so I doubt Facebook was/is sweating that much
you do realise that boosting the amount games are typically sold at would also boost the price when they are on discount…like 50% off would suddenly be $40. Like this isn’t a great argument since we would still see an increase in the price when deals happen
Then don’t buy the game, we always hear talk of vote with your wallet, as a consumer you should look out for yourself and your money, as companies, Microsoft included are not in the business of making less money from you. Game Pass a bet by Microsoft that they can make more money over the long term by lowering the barrier of entry, the fact that it saves consumers money is just an extra. If anyone feels that a certain price is to high even after a discount, they just shouldn’t support it, if everyone actually bothered doing so this type of price gouging wouldn’t be happening like the current $70 game with MTX.
But adults keep acting like children and just impulse buying something while complaining about the price like they’re not part of the problem, just because they have to play this game as soon as it launches like it won’t be there months/years later at a better price. If they’re content creators, I would understand as that’s part of their job and it’s a business expanse to continue making said content.
no its literally changing what the normal price is in a business and X amount won’t seem like to much for most people if it becomes the new industry standard, games in the UK for example have went from £30 to £65 in around a decade, the price has over doubled. I doubt most casual gamers will just ditch the annual CoD and sports games so that standard under the circumstances I layed out would probably happen but what you are saying is that consumers should have to take action because the FTC and DOJ can’t protect us, instead focusing on Employees which can quit and get a new Job within the same industry at any point.
I really don’t think you have a solid argument here, mainly because your argument relies on this weird false hypothetical (game pricing because of an acquisition) in place of the reality that developers (aka human beings) are currently facing with treatment at Activision. I hate to break it to you but in this instance “the consumer” is the least of anyone’s concerns, and rightfully so.
You can live in this optimistic dream world where there shouldn’t be any discrimination or abuse, and while I’d love to live there too, we live in a reality where this does happen and in this specific case there’s enough documented benefit for Microsoft to take the reigns. Consumers are only a part of the equation when acquisitions of this size are analyzed, and to say they’re the most important is pretty reductive and dismissive of the people who are actually most affected: the employees. Put in simpler terms, if employees continue to be mistreated they’ll leave the company, and if enough do that’s how studio closures have happened, and as a result the almighty consumer doesn’t get their games.
Why should they only be held accountable when an acquisition happens, Activisions law suit from the EEOC resulted in only an 18 million fine, that is 0.29% if the profit they made in 2021. I think the fact we are focusing on employees with an acquisition and not in general which is supported by this is beyoend stupid. Monopoly law’s are meant to protect the costumers not the employees. I will be honest, the fact they are bring it up for this acquisitions tells me they care more about pushing their proposals on changing how we view mergers and acquisitions rather than the actual employees but that 2nd part is just me, but the idea the stat of the entire industry should be more determained by the employees than the consumers is dumb in my honest opinion
I think it depends on the view point and how Microsoft wants to acquire. If they want to acquire defensively T2 or EA are by far the best purchases, expanding would lead to someone from a country xbox/game pass isn’t big in e.g. Japan or they may want to pay a company which stock is tanking at it would be amazing value most likely in which case Ubisoft
What? I never said the “entire industry should be more ‘determained’ (determined) by the employees’. I was speaking to the merits of Warren’s argument and describing why your argument is meaningless in that context (again fiction vs. reality). Furthermore thinking that the employees have no value in this events is “dumb” and really doesn’t belong on this forum, they’re people too and actually are considered in acquisition reviews. So whether you think they’re “dumb” or not, doesn’t matter.
You need to actually do some studying on what “competition” refers to; it’s a holistic term in this case, which also refers to the effect a monopoly would have on its opinion. You’re constantly twisting people’s words or interpreting them incorrectly to fit your baseless argument.
I said the idea which I think that saniter is trying to push. I am done with this convosation because its being brought up when its already gone again but my opinion remains the same and while I can’t prove it, I feel like if it went up to a vote in America most people would want the consumer to be the priority when it comes to these laws.
You tagged me, I’m simply responding and providing data points as someone who’s followed acquisitions and the laws surrounding them. You’re arguing that one group should be more important than another in these, and not only is that morally wrong, it’s also legally wrong as the FTC’s primary focus isn’t the consumer, they are a part of the equation but by no means the most important. Primary consumer protections were under the purview of the CFPB, ironically founded by Warren (and dismantled by Trump).
maybe they reconsider the acquisition of EA after all the sports games would be a nice “niche” for the gp. but my favorite remains tt
forget square enix that now is based only on final fantasy
In all seriousness, the only acquisitions I would like from MS left is them acquiring their remaining closes partners: asobo, certain affinity and that studio helping Fallout 76.
I dont want nintendo and sony players to lost more games (specially nintendo if we are talking about japanese publishers) so I hope instead of an acquisition, MS could negotiate something with, lets say, SEGA to bring all of their games to gamepass.
EA has a pretty great lineup in the future - between multiple Respawn games, a new studo for Skate, Dead Space coming back and their stellar work with indie teams. Not to mention their sports games (slightly easier to deal with having given Fifa the boot), their sim games (The Sims would be a huge get for PC gamepass) and their now massive racing game line up. From what I hear they have a good work culture too. EA would be a very solid get for Microsoft.
That said, all of their games are multiplatform and on game pass shortly after launch - it isn’t the most exciting of deals and I would say there’s not much risk of them being bought by Sony. So eh, there is much more interesting publishers that could bring more benefit to consumers.
