Microsoft aren’t making a monopoly by buying Activision, they’re protecting one

G from WASDuk ponders what does Microsoft actually has to gain from their recent acquisitions, other than the obvious.

XiNatsuDragnel599d ago

I feel they are trying to making monopoly due to solely of having COD- one if not the biggest game for the competing platform PS in my opinion that's why I think it's a monopoly.

ABizzel1599d ago

Is the Activision deal a monopoly, No. The issue isn't this specific deal, it's what happens if/when this goes through and will future acquisitions be considered monopoly tactics. Microsoft has a 40 year history of being sued for constantly engaging in monopoly like tactics. They have PLENTY of lawsuits against them from consumers / states / countries / antitrust charges / and more for price gauging, anti-competition practices, etc...

So the legal standpoint is do you let the company that has a history of being sued every decade and dragging out said court trails for over a decade for monopoly like tactics start deploying those same tactics into another area of their business. That's the issue the MS faces.

Xbox fans need to be worried more about what MS plans to raise GamePass up to after these acquisitions and their games/products start to release. They tried to double the cost of XBLG annual subscription and gamers collectively shut it down. But what happens if they say it's worth $20/mo. at the launch of Starfield, and when they have COD in GP and they say it's worth $25/mo and then $30/mo before the end of the falling year.

Sound crazy, but that's exactly what they did with Office. Turned it into a subscription based service as well.
Then Increased the price of it by 10% last year, and within the same calendar year had another price increase of 20%.

Prime157599d ago (Edited 599d ago )

Nice argument as to why it's not even close.

Edit: I'm not saying I disagree. I'm saying I'm tired of one sentence rebuttals. If you can't state a different perspective, then what are you offering?

People need to stop buying into one sentence cast-offs and non-arguments.

Locutus_of_borg598d ago

“ Xbox fans need to be worried more about what MS plans to raise GamePass up to after these acquisitions and their games/products start to release.”

I can only speak for myself, but if/when game pass price increases beyond a point that I feel doesn’t give me value then I’ll just cancel anyway and go back to buying my games … I’m fairly certain everyone has their own level and a price increase could loose them millions is subscribers, Microsoft has to tread a very fine line with subscription price

ABizzel1598d ago (Edited 598d ago )


Therein is the issue, by the point people have had enough, the masses will be so indoctrinated into just staying with subscriptions that it'll be hard not to have it, especially if physical copy releases start to diminish due to subscription services.

The DVD/Blu Ray industry has dropped down to 10% of the annual physical sales that it was less than 10 years ago due to streaming / on demand. CDs have dropped down to the same result and have been at a low since 2004 (closing in on 20 years). Physical media will be a slow and dying format by the time people finally say enough it's too much. People were complaining about $70 physical games, if physical sales fall off to just 10%, or even 50% of what they are now, because half the gamers are signed up for these subscription services, then they're going to have a heart attack if physical copies are only released as limited editions or premium editions starting at $99 to help make up for the loss of sales, and to make lower production numbers even worth having a physical copy.

Financially I'm not bothered with the cost per say, and I can see the value in such services, especially for parents of gamer kids (it's a set it and forget it type of deal). Even at $30/mo. and maybe even up to $50/mo with an EXTREMELY overhaul of content and benefits could I see myself paying for such as service, but it's also because I've already accepted that this is the path that gamers have chosen, PS Spartacus could likely be a similar solution, gamers (specifically Xbox gamers) are continuously marketing their own financial trap of championing GamePass and not buying games at retail at a staggering rate (sales of multiplatform games are still heavily in favor of PS), "Is it coming to GamePass" and "I'll wait for it come to GamePass" are two of the most common phrases regarding games launching on Xbox.

This is the path MS wants the industry to move towards. Once again it's the same thing they did with Office and Azure, and if they could do it without backlash they'd make Windows OS a subscription service as well. Pay your monthly or annual subscription to access Windows coming 2030 isn't as farfetched as it sounds, based on their history. And the only thing holding them back is potential competition (if they charge for Windows they run the risk of their OME monopoly starting to make more Android OS based desktop and laptops going forward giving Google an opportunity to take a large portion of that market share).

Companies need checks and balances.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 598d ago
thesoftware730599d ago (Edited 599d ago )

Then you don't know what a monopoly is.

Did you read that they would still be smaller than Sony even with this Acquisition?

purple101599d ago

In what respect? Games sold per year?

I'm interested.

Also.. talking of interest

. Cod at its peak was 18- 19 million playstation and 18-19 million Xbox.

Nowadays interest has waned, it's down to 18million ps5 and
12 million Xbox.

So deffo a drop of of players compared to it's height.

Kerppamaister599d ago

@Purple money gained selling games.

LucasRuinedChildhood599d ago (Edited 599d ago )

"Did you read that they would still be smaller than Sony even with this Acquisition?"

This talking point is based on an objectively false assumption. It assumes that Sony and MS's (combined with Activision's) revenue would remain roughly the same if the biggest gaming franchise was removed from Sony's platform.

We all know that's not true. Sony would lose billions from their yearly revenue through lower console sales (although, maybe not immediately) and no 30% cut from mainline COD games post 2023. Please be honest, lads.

dumahim599d ago


There's already deals in place that MS has to honor. There's still 3 more that will still be on PS. After that, who knows. While Sony would be losing revenue from COD going away, MS will also lose money compared to what Activision was making on it being multiplat.

Crows90599d ago

No. They're not smaller. Maybe technically smaller but in terms of mainstream gaming they now have the biggest titles.

All of Bethesda and all of Activision. Including all their studios. That's about 90% of all mutliplatform bug name publishers.

DOMination-599d ago

"In what respect?"


Scroll down to the Rankings table.

"All of Bethesda and all of Activision. Including all their studios. That's about 90% of all mutliplatform bug name publishers."

90% would probably be the definition of a monopoly but.. seriously? No it isn't. Not even close. Just take a look at the link above. The list of publishers is endless. Of the most well known, these are still alive and kicking: EA, Ubisoft, Tencent, Epic, Embracer, Warner, Take-2, Capcom, Namco, Square, Valve, CDPR, Sega, 505..

If anyone has a "monopoly", it's Sony Interactive Entertainment because they have by far the biggest revenue and profits, even after the MS acquisition of AB and Beth. You can't be a "monopoly" for being the third biggest!

theindiearmy599d ago


"We all know that's not true. Sony would lose billions from their yearly revenue through lower console sales (although, maybe not immediately) and no 30% cut from mainline COD games post 2023. Please be honest, lads."

Yes, and Activision would no longer receive their cut of the sale anymore either. Which is larger than 30%. So no matter how you slice it, a MS/Acti combination will still be behind Sony when it comes to revenue. The only way that would change if is a majority of the COD players switch to Xbox, which isn't going to happen when they can't even make enough consoles for the demand before that hypothetical.

DarXyde599d ago

You're missing a lot of important context and nuance.

Bigger than Microsoft, yes, but oddly absent is any mention of Microsoft centralizing massive aspects of the gaming industry. The time and money invested in those games by consumers are pretty outlandish. You don't think it's even slightly off that the same company owns Minecraft, Elder Scrolls, Fallout, Candy Crush, and Call of Duty? And not through organic growth, but through throwing money at the problem?

Separately, it's one thing. Acquire maybe one or two and that's pretty bad, but whatever. But all three? You don't think this is a dangerous precedent? You don't see the budding Monopoly?

All of this to pad XGP, knowing people are very likely to take this up.

People are too short-sighted to understand that this is the first step in something colossally damaging.

If it isn't a monopoly yet, it's damn well on its way to becoming one.

Prime157599d ago (Edited 599d ago )

Microsoft's total total assets are valued over a trillion, while Sony's total assets are valued at less then 100 billion.

Microsoft's worth is 10x-20x more than Sony.

"Not a Monopoly" as they swing their Monopoly money to go from 0 in the gaming department to buying Sony's total worth in publishers.

It's delusional.

Stop comparing XBox to PlayStation if you want to talk about monopolies.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 599d ago
green599d ago (Edited 599d ago )

Do you even know what a monolopy is? This is not even remotely close to being one.

EDIT: To anyone disagreeing, then show actual stats (not feelings) of how this acquisition is a monopoly?

When Disney purchased Fox, their market share of the movie industry was 35%. The Fox deal took them to 40% and the deal was still approved by the FTC.

According to Newzoo, Microsoft's gaming market share was 6.5% in 2020 and adding Activision would take it to 10.7%. How on earth is 10.7% even close to a monopoly? lol

Kerppamaister599d ago

Well, somebody said it in a tweet or video or something and now peggies and ponies are running with it.

Silly gameAr599d ago

You didn't mention the best example of a monolopy. Windows. You know, the other monolopy that MS created?

green599d ago

@Silly gamerAr

I was not trying to educate him on what a monopoly is but to tell him how this is not a monopoly. Maybe you can emlighten us on how Microsofts 1998 lawsuit that saw them accused of trying to create a monopoly that led to the collapse of rival Netscape by giving its browser software for free with its 98% share OS, is similar to Mictosoft buying Activision?

thesoftware730599d ago

Thank you for applying sound logic green.

But I fear that it will go unacknowledged based of of what people like.

If you think about their arguments, which is clearly based on their feelings, and not the truth, they are saying MS is now more well equipped than Sony. Their arguments are more Inductive than deductive.

Prime157599d ago

I love all the people comparing the gaming market share as if that means anything.

Horizontal integration may not be a monopoly by law, but it has the same ramifications that vertical monopolies of the past had.

If you're comparing Microsoft vs Sony as monopolies, but you're only talking about XBox and PlayStation, then you're bringing micro understanding to a macro discussion. Please stop.

Microsoft as a whole is valued over a TRILLION dollars. Sony as a whole is valued at around 80 billion. Horizontal monopolies need to be a discussion for the future of humanity and capitalism. They have similar ramifications to vertical monopolies.

Here's the whole data that people are forgetting when they wrongly compare XBox to PlayStation instead of Microsoft to Sony, and the semantics matter:

Microsoft just spent Sony's total value to acquire 2 publishers for its gaming departments.

So, while I agree with this article's point that Microsoft is trying to block Apple, Google, and Facebook's entry into the gaming market share... By no means does this move disprove Microsoft as a whole being just as bad as Apple, Google, and Facebook where Sony's total value is decimated...

Not that Sony isn't a giant in its own right, either.

dominicdecoco598d ago

Honestly, I'm not worried about a monopoly cause that will probably never happen. Instead, we should be worried about an oligopoly something very common in the US and is known to cause problems. ( AT&T, Verizon, T mobile) Cause we should be worried about this industry becoming one controlled by Sony, Microsoft, Tencent

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 598d ago
GrmpyolGamer 599d ago

Tell me U don't know what a monopoly is without telling me you don't know what a monopoly is

CrimsonWing69599d ago

I don’t think that’s how it works.

Zeref599d ago

Call of duty is big but not essential to any platform. Nintendo Switch is doing over a 100 million without COD.

Neofire598d ago

I agree this deal is a monopoly

n1kki6598d ago

Their are 500 publishers and 2500 developers in the US alone. Gamers are morons.