It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Word is it might not even happen at all because of antitrust challenges.
avatar
Breja: You mean as distinct parts of one big project, rather than one being an adaptation of the other? It's been tried a few times. Shadows of the Empire comes to mind.

[url=https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Star_Wars:_Shadows_of_the_Empire]https://starwars.fandom.com/wiki/Star_Wars:_Shadows_of_the_Empire[/url]

Sorry, for some reason the forum just won't let me post a working link. >sigh<
It's the colon that messes it up, need to encode that, like so
avatar
Swedrami: Word is it might not even happen at all because of antitrust challenges.
Probably will go through, because "it is "still very hard to challenge vertical mergers"", but does seem like it's spurring a review of the guidelines that may help in the future.
Post edited January 23, 2022 by Cavalary
avatar
tyl0413: Battle.net is Win32 therefor it actually at least functions some of the time unlikely the buggy ass UWP Windows Store (which is Win 10/11 exclusive too)
Xbox got achievements though
That's why they should just move to Steam but you're right if they did that they'd probably wanna push their own instead of Steam. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if once they got enough Game Pass subs and they wanna go all in on it, they just delisted all their games from Steam so you're forced to rent them.

One of the only reasons I think this is a good thing is that we may get some of those older games back on storefronts.
I'm not sure if they'd actually let Raven make Singularity 2 and stuff but the old games coming back is good enough for me and more realistic than expecting MS to invest in dead IPs when they can just milk COD.
avatar
ChuckBeaver: Steam has you renting already bud. Kinda why we chill at gog. Customers shouldnt feel priviledged to rent with a few owned games. Customers should feel reasonably confident thay they actually own the product they paid for.

I correct my own comment....we shouldnt even have to think about "if" we own what we pay for. That just sucks a big company makes millions of customers think about such a thing at all.
I completely agree. Steam is the best there is for many games though. Obviously i'd like to see more on GOG but being realistic getting some of these physical/Battle.net only games on Steam would be an improvement over how they are now and it's unlikely MS would support GOG currently, they only use Steam bc that's where they can sell the most copies.
Post edited January 23, 2022 by tyl0413
avatar
Swedrami: Word is it might not even happen at all because of antitrust challenges.
avatar
Cavalary: Probably will go through, because "it is "still very hard to challenge vertical mergers", but does seem like it's spurring a review of the guidelines that may help in the future.
I'd say it is nearly certain that Microsoft's purchase of Activision will go through. Just look at Disney having bought out Fox's entire entertainment portfolio. That is in TV/movies which is a far more consolidated industry than video games.
Then there is the operating systems market which Microsoft totally dominates. Windows is still going strong after Microsoft successfully fended off antitrust suits.

A government agency wanting to be more strict on mergers and acquisitions is going to have a hard time to really crackdown on antitrust stuff without Congress passing new legislation to assist in that effort. Right now almost any big business deal can just point to Disney/Fox and say "How is that okay but my deal isn't?"

I'm not saying giant buyouts are a good thing, just that we don't have that strong of antitrust laws.
avatar
b_smith_81: A government agency wanting to be more strict on mergers and acquisitions is going to have a hard time to really crackdown on antitrust stuff without Congress passing new legislation to assist in that effort. Right now almost any big business deal can just point to Disney/Fox and say "How is that okay but my deal isn't?"

I'm not saying giant buyouts are a good thing, just that we don't have that strong of antitrust laws.
If, as you say, the laws will change, then what was ok in the past won't be ok anymore (and vice-versa in other areas, of course), so past examples can't be used if anything will change. And sometimes even if they don't in terms of the letter of the law, the way it's interpreted may change, possibly following clarification rulings from high courts.
avatar
Gede: I do wonder if anyone, at some time, tried to develop the interactive and non-interactive entertainment side-by-side. It would be a big gamble.
avatar
Breja: You mean as distinct parts of one big project, rather than one being an adaptation of the other? It's been tried a few times. Shadows of the Empire comes to mind.
Curious. I did not know about it. Though that project was withing a well established franchise, so it would be a low risk endeavour.

It is always possible that in more than one situation plans were made, talks may be had, and work may have started, but some bad reception at some point (release or test group) led to the cancellation of the full thing because indicators were not favorable.
avatar
Swedrami: Word is it might not even happen at all because of antitrust challenges.
Dude, the US allowed Disney to buy 20th Century Fox without antitrust stopping it, I'm pretty sure it'll go through. The US federal government is pretty much toothless when it comes to corporations.
avatar
Swedrami: Word is it might not even happen at all because of antitrust challenges.
avatar
Crosmando: Dude, the US allowed Disney to buy 20th Century Fox without antitrust stopping it, I'm pretty sure it'll go through. The US federal government is pretty much toothless when it comes to corporations.
Exactly this. If freakin' Disney is allowed to gobble up whatever they please, there is no way in hell this is gonna be stopped.

A precedent has been set. If it somehow gets declined, all they have to do in court is point at Disney and ask "Why was that allowed?".
Post edited January 28, 2022 by idbeholdME
I wouldn't be surprised if Ubisoft is next
avatar
Gede: I do wonder if anyone, at some time, tried to develop the interactive and non-interactive entertainment side-by-side. It would be a big gamble.
Defiance tried this. It was a TV series broadcast on the Syfy Network that also had an MMORPG developed by Trion Worlds that was released at the same time. The intention was for the two mediums to parallel each other -- the MMO receiving updates alongside new plot arcs from the TV series, and the TV series reflecting the outcome of a few world-event/challenges that took place in the MMO.

A very cool idea, but I don't recall the TV show ever explicitly mentioning anything that happened within the MMO. And the TV series got canceled after just a couple seasons while the MMO continued on its own. So, I wouldn't call it a smashing success, but it was at least an example of trying to develop interactive and non-interactive entertainment side-by-side (and the difficulty of doing so).
avatar
Gede: I do wonder if anyone, at some time, tried to develop the interactive and non-interactive entertainment side-by-side. It would be a big gamble.
avatar
Ryan333: Defiance tried this. It was a TV series broadcast on the Syfy Network that also had an MMORPG developed by Trion Worlds that was released at the same time. The intention was for the two mediums to parallel each other (...)
Wow, I had no idea. Thank you very much for the information.
Rise from the dead, thread, for we have juicy happenings. The Federal Trade Commission has sued Microsoft to block the purchase of Activision-Blizzard over anti-competition concerns.
https://www.gematsu.com/2022/12/federal-trade-commission-sues-to-block-microsoft-from-acquiring-activision-blizzard
I'm not surprised, this administration has been a lot more aggressive in going after these kinds of deals. Though it's still a bit chilling how people were fine with or praising the merger as some great deal, as though the only way Activision-Blizzard games could possibly come to Xbox Game Pass is by getting bought out by Microsoft.
Holy crap they're actually doing something. Likely will fail, but glad they bothered to try.
avatar
StingingVelvet: Holy crap they're actually doing something. Likely will fail, but glad they bothered to try.
How many other major mergers have they ignored, too? Are they only interested in this because it's from Microsoft?