Google, Nvidia Express Concerns to FTC About Microsoft’s Activision Deal

The two companies joined Sony in raising issues with the $69 billion transaction, which the FTC has sued to block

Read Full Story >>

The story is too old to be commented.
luckytrouble72d ago

Well at this point Microsoft can't exactly claim this is exclusively Sony trying to deny them the ability to compete, which forever remains a stupid argument for their inability to maintain any level of quality in their exclusive content.

Sonyslave372d ago (Edited 72d ago )

lol did you read the Article Nividia isn't against the deal and Google lol they shut down Stadia on their own they could of brought Activison themesleves but didn't.

Plus Nivida Stream didn't have ABK games before the deal lol so i don't see how this is a problem and Nvidia Cloud services been out since 2015 way before gamepass if they didn't improve their services it on them and plus they have 20mil users with ABK games.

S2Killinit72d ago

Why do you start all comments with “lol”

Serious question.

Eonjay72d ago (Edited 72d ago )

Maybe suck harder?
In the mean time us consumers and gamers will try to salvage our hobby. I think we can all see the danger but a few who have been purposely radicalized.

Christopher72d ago (Edited 72d ago )

***Nividia isn't against the deal***

Saying "Nvidia stressed the need for equal and open access to game titles but didn’t directly oppose the acquisition" doesn't say what you said. They said more to be against it than they did anything about not being against it.

***i don't see how this is a problem and Nvidia Cloud services been out since 2015 way before gamepass***

Nvidia's streaming service isn't their own storefront but provides services based on your purchases on other storefronts. Microsoft is acting as both a game store and a service provider for streaming. Nvidia is only a service provider that they want to offer across all storefronts. With some companies withdrawing their games directly from the use of Nvidia's streaming service, it only proves that companies want to get paid directly for you to play a game you already own via streaming or want to control the platform you utilize to do it (both things Microsoft will gain with this purchase).

*** lol they shut down Stadia on their own they could of brought Activison themesleves but didn't***

This is not making the argument you think it is. Google chose to not buy its way into the industry and they think that should be the industry standard, even after its failures within the industry.

Lore72d ago

“So I don’t see how this is a problem.”

Maybe because you know nothing of M&A, from both a business and law perspective and you are in no way professionally literate on the subject. These arguments and nuances are complex. If it were enough for someone on N4G to chime in on and say “well I don’t see the issue” then they wouldn’t be spending millions of dollars and hundreds/thousands of cumulative hours drafting legal documents and making arguments.

To keep it simple, this is not a simple matter of market share moving hands. Msft corp. is one of few trillion dollar corporations, where by seeking a new publisher the size of ActivBlzd, smart leaders are questioning what this means in terms of cloud gaming, game pass as a service and what this could ultimately do to competition down the line. From the sounds of it, appears as though you can’t even begin to fathom where to begin when having a discussion regarding this deal. But go ahead and continue making foolish comments

343_Guilty_Spark71d ago


So in other words you didn't read it.

DarXyde71d ago (Edited 71d ago )

True that Google could have bought them, but maybe the point is that ABK should remain an independent publisher, which is why they didn't...?

Moreover, you might not be familiar with how Nvidia services work....

No corporation against this acquisition is an angel... That said, I don't think they're misguided in their opposition either. Call of Duty mobile would probably get pulled from the Play store, access to ABK games via GeForce Now is threatened, and Sony having the obvious case here with loss of access to ABK titles. They're all self interested and they stand to lose here. The worst part to me is that the execs will be excused for their wrongdoing. I don't care about their games.

That said, I don't know what will be made of these objections and it might be in vain, but these companies are certainly obligated to try. I do hope they succeed and Kottick and his goons rot in prison.

Rimeskeem71d ago

I can't read the article, bloomberg won't let me.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 71d ago
darkrider72d ago

Nope, they already have more studios then Sony...

VenomUK72d ago (Edited 72d ago )

@Sonyslave3. You have misunderstood the article. You said: “lol did you read the Article Nividia isn't against the deal and Google lol.”

However the article opens with: “ Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Nvidia Corp. have expressed concerns to the Federal Trade Commission about Microsoft Corp.’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard.”

Google and Nvidia ARE against the deal, that’s literally what the article is about.

SierraGuy72d ago

This deal will never go through. Too many big players against it.

Christopher71d ago

***This deal will never go through. Too many big players against it.***

I wouldn't say this at all. It's heated up a little with this new info, but Microsoft still has a strong chance to win this and then the true buyout of the industry will begin with investment companies who just buy out industries where they feel they can make easy money on IP control.

shinoff218372d ago (Edited 72d ago )

I've been saying that. How does ms need to buy all these publishers of multiplatform games when it already has more studios then sony already. That's an internal ms problem.

Also sonyslave expressing concern is still something whether you believe it or not. Did you read the article cause I wasn't signing up and it makes you

neutralgamer199272d ago

This is awesome. This may not be a popular opinion but as gamers we should be against these acquisitions. Ms already gave zenimax

This is not a pro gamer deal and shouldn't go through. Someone has to stop this deal. And please stop buying publishers

Microsoft already bought so many studios and bought zenimax so please just manage the talent you have acquired already. Games like fallout, starfield and elder scrolls are already exclusives

Please stop buying publishers: Xbox , PlayStation, Nintendo etc. Invest in smaller studios who could use your resources not these well funded publishers

RpgSama72d ago

100% Agree,

I find it amazing how poorly managed MS Studios are, It's absurd to think of the amount of developers MS bought already + Zenimax and how that translated to barely any changes so far in their game release calendar so far.

gangsta_red72d ago

"This is not a pro gamer deal and shouldn't go through."

How is it not a pro gamer deal?

"Invest in smaller studios who could use your resources not these well funded publisher"

They already have and we still get bitter comments of "MS is destroying gaming" or "MS is a Monopoly". And who says these publishers were well funded? If that were the case why were they sold?

Rude-ro72d ago

“How is it not a pro gamer deal?”

If one major company with next to no output in gaming in any way takes control of gaming, then your gaming will be dictated by said company.
Microsoft’s output in the last decade has been more money towards marketing and viral media attacks than gaming.
Their biggest focus in budgeting has been marketing research for Kinect and purchasing third party developers.
Results? Cheap games, subscriptions, and a failed Kinect.

This is not Microsoft’s first go around with acquisitions and dismantling of said companies after getting rights to licenses.

“They already have and we still get bitter comments of "MS is destroying gaming" or "MS is a Monopoly". And who says these publishers were well funded? If that were the case why were they sold?“

Facts are not bitter… they are facts. A blind loyalty takes offense and uses the words such as “butter”.

As far as sold.. look at the age of the CEOs, the cost of competition vs output, and understand when a company reaches a peak size, it is time to jump ship when the cash out will be huge

The value is not in the games…
It is in the licensing and patents that are in said deals…
being they stretch far and wide…
This becomes a monopoly to the very definition because it effects all of gaming, development, and sales/profit,

Why would anyone want Microsoft with that much control in gaming via the returns of their time in “gaming”?

gangsta_red72d ago

Everything you said just reads as a MS is an evil corporation fan fiction piece.

"This is not Microsoft’s first go around with acquisitions and dismantling of said companies after getting rights to licenses."

When? You mean like every company has done?
There has been no recent evidence that they're going to break up and dismantle any of their current acquisitions.

"Facts are not bitter… they are facts"

Except these not facts, there just "butter" comments as stated. For example, yours, stating hypotheticals or basing what might happen to their purchases because of what MS did decades ago, something that every publisher from Sony to EA have done for years.

Again, how is it "not good for gaming" when absolutely not one point is made about why it wouldn't be other than the tired rant of "I hate MS because...".

MS has made every game available on every possible platform outside of Xbox,, then MS made an affordable next gen machine, MS has created Game Pass that gives gamers more choices to play different games

Where is this bad for gamers?

neutralgamer199272d ago

I will answer your question with common sense brother and not get defensive. I have a lot to say and If you or anyone want to have a mature conversation we can. But read the whole comment

If this deal is allowed to go through how can FTC or anyone stop any other company from acquiring another publisher or a whole company ? Tencent is a trillion dollar company looking to acquire so should they be allowed to acquire EA or Take two? On what basis will FTC or anyone stop them. There is such a thing as PRECEDENT

I am basing my opinion on the fact if this deal is allowed to go through that Sony will retaliate and this why I said it's not a pro gamer deal. MS already got zenimax and have made all their future games exclusives so they will do the same with Activision besides COD

I as a gamer am not willing to trade zenimax and Activision to Xbox and than have Sony buy Capcom and square enix etc. Sony is not worth 2.2 trillion like Microsoft But please understand the fact to Sony PlayStation is way more important than Xbox is to Microsoft and I don't mean that in any negative way. Microsoft has and can survive without Xbox whereas Sony needs PlayStation so when push comes to shove they may merge with someone or acquire publishers in Japan which they above the inside track too

MS have so many studios plus they have zenimax so they don't need Activision, I understand why they are doing it though. To Microsoft the most important thing is game pass when it comes to Xbox. Their end goal is to have GP on devices/platforms other than just Xbox and PC

If they buy Activision and follow it up with UBI or take two and give sony the choice either allow GP on PlayStation or PlayStation won't get the games what do you think will happen? They want a different type of monopoly not just buying publishers, just like they have windows

I am of the mindset more options are better not less

Tacoboto72d ago

And Activision as a publisher - what exactly has their own management style done for gaming in the last five years?

Lawsuit after lawsuit. After lawsuit.
Firing hundreds of employees when announcing record profits.
Consolidation around one single IP: Call of Duty
... But Crash 4!
...... Which led to that studio becoming a COD support studio.
... And now Crash is back!
...... As a GaaS Battle Rumble thing no one asked for.

Activision has capitalized itself into a single IP at the expense of every other IP they have. For Blizzard, it would be a miracle if Diablo 4 doesn't launch with massive backlash, based on everything they've done lately from Immortal and the restrictions on Diablo 2's remaster to the disaster of Overwatch 2's first months.

But because Microsoft is going for them, suddenly N4G acts as if Activision has been a good guy for gaming this whole time.

SullysCigar71d ago

I'm not sure anyone thinks Activision are the good guys of gaming... I agree with everything else to that point.

shinoff218372d ago

I think ms is the only one to have bought publishers between the 3 consoles/handled makers

thesoftware73071d ago


You saw my post about Sony buy Pysgnosis.

343_Guilty_Spark71d ago

Your argument against the deal is they have too many studios?

neutralgamer199271d ago

Is that not a fact? They have too much talent under them and need to manage that instead of acquiring more. Their track record of management when it comes to Xbox studios isn't great or even very good

I know this I am tired of seeing these articles. One way or another this needs to end. I do hope all those defending MS's right to acquire publishers will show the same support to PlayStation when they buy multiple publishers too

It's not a matter of if it's when. The only reason there is such calm right now because everyone is waiting to see what happens

This deal has long term ramifications for acquisitions in general

AmUnRa71d ago (Edited 71d ago )

thesoftware730, Pysgnosis was not a publisher it was a your argument falls flat on the nose...

onisama71d ago

Stop buying publishers and buy studios and popular ips (spiderman) and games exclsuivity (street fighter project eve final fantasy....) or better buy exclsuive contents and cut them from other games (COD - hogwards legacy....)

FinalFantasyFanatic71d ago (Edited 71d ago )

I don't know why people aren't more afraid of all these developers and publishers consolidating, it really reminds me of Disney and all it's studio acquisitions. I cannot possibly fathom how this is good for the industry or gamers, especially if we end up with one or two entities swallowing almost everything up (you know this will cause an acquisition spree for those who can afford it).

In the case of Microsoft, they just want everything on game pass to squeeze out competition, hence why you won't find Nintendo or Sony offering game pass on their systems.

gangsta_red71d ago (Edited 71d ago )

You still haven't answered why this is not a pro gamer deal.

Guilty Spark is right, your argument just seems to be "MS has too many studios", but how exactly is that not pro gamer? You haven't explained that at all. Saying less options without explaining exactly what would be less isn't helping your argument either.

Gamers are still getting games, games are still releasing on platforms, where is the threat to pro gamers?

Let's just be honest...this is a threat to pro Sony gamers. Because anyone who owns a Xbox, PC or any device that streams or has Game Pass will be able to play any game from MS.

And these made up extreme scenarios are even more baffling...what if Sony bought Capcom or Square, and what if MS bought Ubi and EA...what exactly do you think would change for us? Games would still be made and released. There would still be options, there would still be no monopoly, there wouldn't be one publisher controlling all of gaming, and everyone would game as normal.

People wanted MS to get more first party studios, now they're wanting them to stop and making made up rules on how capitalism should work, like no one can buy established studios, no one can buy publishers, you can only buy studios you have close relations with.

If the Activision deal goes through, nothing will change unless you're a Playstation only gamer.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 71d ago
blue8872d ago (Edited 72d ago )

Yeah this Activision Blizzard deal probably ain’t going through at this point. Microsoft should of just brought bungie to try fix Halo instead of going after
Activision Blizzard now it’s to late.

Crows9072d ago

Microsoft trying to fix halo would be Microsoft actually caring about their games. That's not gonna happen.

Lightning7771d ago

But yet Sea Of Thieves, Forza Horizon, Grounded and State Of Decay 2 are doing very well.

1 mismanaged game in which are mismanaged by the studio heads themselves means everything else is bad right?

Crows9071d ago


Umm what are those games? Barely heard of them. Except of course's funny that Microsoft depends greatly on a racing game...the only consistent far as the other games...pretty irrelevant.

Lightning7771d ago

Now they're "irrelevant " because I destroyed your little narrative which wasn't hard at all btw, super easy. Now you're playin dumb wow.

Crows9071d ago


No. You didnt destroy anything. Microsoft doesnt care about their games. Crackdown 3 is another example. Fable legends and all previous crappy kinect fables is another. The fact that only now they allowed a developer to do something different instead of more Forza Horizon is testament to them not caring about delivering new experiences either.

State of Decay 2 isnt microsoft caring. Thats a sequel to the first which didnt really have anyting to do with microsoft. Grounded belongs to obsidian ...another developer that isnt influenced by microsoft..they just bought them. Sea of Theives was horrible at launch. Microsoft had 2 options. Either close the studio and get bad press or keep it open ...sea of theives is okay but nothing to brag about since...well microsoft doesnt brag about it either.

gangsta_red71d ago (Edited 71d ago )

So can I cherry pick and claim Sony mismanages studios because of Sony All Stars BR, how about that Destruction All Stars game from Sony...Days Gone wasn't a hit either, Drive Club was dropped pretty fast too

It's funny how you focus on a couple of games and equate that to MS mismanaging all their games. And the ones that Lightning brings up you just automatically dismiss them because you haven't heard of them, which is a lie, because you obviously have.

Sea of Thieves has constantly been updated and continues to break records with player count. MS has also allowed Rare to constantly make different games, something you said MS doesn't allow.

Grounded is under MS, not even sure what your comment meant stating MS had nothing to do with it. That was a thin stretch dismissing the game in the first place and now made thinner by you having to come up with excuse to somehow separate MS from the game.

State of Decay 2 being a sequel has nothing to do with MS?...what exactly does this excuse even mean? Yes it's a sequel and they have worked exclusively with MS since the beginning and was picked up by MS and given a bigger budget for part 3. So how does that have nothing to do with MS?

Lightning proved that MS has a more diverse line of games other than Forza .and your only comeback was "I never heard of them" or "MS wasn't really involved with that". A very weak narrative instantly destroyed by an even weaker reply from you.

Lightning7771d ago (Edited 71d ago )

Really? So what about PS All Stars, Drawn To Death, Shadowfall, Drive Club Knack games Days Gone since you want to continuously pick out bad titles from MS I can do the exact same. Let's look at 3rd party. The Order didn't score well at all. Since Sony is all about Metacritic and reception that game most won't be coming back despite fans begging and pleading for its return? Even if it does return it could be multiplat. Where's Deep Down? Where's Wild? Street Fighter 5 was underwhelming despite the money hat. Now Street Fighter 6 is multiplat again. Forspoken is looking a little shaky right now. Hopefully it's. Surprise hit. You forgot all About those games that under whelmed didn't you? It's ok so did Sony.

It's called trial and error kid it's obvious Sony has learned from that and delivers on nearly flawless experiences. MS looks to be doing the same makes sense why there games are in the pipeline for so long.

Regardless you still picked out Halo Infinite as 1 example and overlooked the rest of the games that are managed well. Now it's umm! Umm! "never heard of them!" "they don't matter!" "they're "irrelevant!" keep reaching and reaching. Your narrative still got destroyed.

Crows9071d ago (Edited 71d ago )


Except I'm not cherry picking....those are pretty much all Microsoft games. And feel free to cherry pick out of the large number of highly successful PlayStation games. PlayStation gamers don't pretend that the unsuccessful games are all that. So yeah go ahead and cherry pick. MS is going around buying top notch studios in the 3rd party industry that were making multiplat titles...not at all 2hat Sony has done. I'm not bringing up 3rd party exclusivity...that's not really managed by Sony so yeah ...nothing to do with Microsoft...just like the first halo, first gears, first fable, etc. All Microsoft originally successful titles were already in full development prior to studio purchase...all of them downhill since then so yeah not at all like Sony.

Nothing funny about me picking a couple of games...that's all there is. Just a couple. Days gone was a fantastic game. It was supported as a single player experience and delivered in my opinion. Sequel after sequel of semi successful games doesn't make much sense. Days gone was supported up until launch and it delivered. Sony cared about the game doing well. Microsoft wouldve been like...yeah crackdown 3 is awesome. And they play pretend because they don't actually care. And comparably days gone is a much better game than pretty much anything Microsoft has released for a while least I enjoyed it more...really thought halo ifninite would deliver on that campaign...oh well Microsoft didn't care enough...hence why fans had to let them know it wasn't looking good.

SurgicalMenace71d ago

I mean, what are any of those titles compared to Halo? Are they options to play? Yes. Are they adopted and recognized on the same level as Halo? Hell no. I could gather that this is Crows90 was getting at. Of course, being exclusive to XB, you're going to encounter those other titles, creating a sense of relevance, though only Forza is scarcely mentioned. Squandering Halo is a huge indicator of just how incapable MS management is in the gaming sector.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 71d ago
Asplundh72d ago

The deal will still go through.

And Microsoft already owned Bungie at one point, they were tired of making Halo games and wanted to do other things, which is why Microsoft allowed them to go off on their own. Had Microsoft acquired them again, the talent at that company would had probably walked out.

Profchaos72d ago (Edited 72d ago )

Very true I recall they had to sign over rights for halo to Microsoft as it was technically the property of Bungie at the time in order for them to get the split approved Microsoft originally brought Bungie for 40 million which would have come into the conversation when trying to leave.

Their main pain points were all based around feeling trapped and tied to halo.

It's funny seeing them give up their independence time and time again Activision locked them into Destiny and now Sony who knows what will happen the contract is open ended as to what they can do as long as it's in the live service area and platform agnostic so Xbox, switch successor maybe, PC and ofcourse PlayStation consoles will likely be getting their games

Orchard72d ago

It's probably going through, given the FTC said they want to make concessions and don't want to goto court.

But it will go through with concessions, not without.

SierraGuy72d ago

Microshaft won't agree to the concessions and will back out

Orchard72d ago

Obviously that won’t happen. They want COD revenue, including that which comes from PS.

72d ago
Kornholic71d ago

Of course you of all people would want that.

Orchard71d ago

@Kornholic Yep, I don't deny that. I would love to stop buying COD for $70+ per year and just have it as part of my PC Game Pass subscription.

Also hoping for more investment in Crash amongst other IPs.

SurgicalMenace71d ago

It's not surprising that he's only thinking about himself, but what is $70? Why not give up the hobby if you aren't willing to afford the cost of maintenance? What's suspect is the fact that you say you only have a PS5, though you champion anything pro XB and anti Sony. Weird. Is that because you have to be adult enough to pay for gaming on PS while you only have to pay for access on XB?

Orchard71d ago (Edited 71d ago )

@Surgical "Why not give up the hobby if you aren't willing to afford the cost of maintenance"

Right, so why don't Sony and MS just start selling games for $500? It's just the cost of maintenance, don't worry about it! /s

Only a fool likes to pay more than they have to. If I had 100bn in the bank, I'd still want to pay as little as possible for things. Oh and, for the record, I'm thinking of myself and the other tens of millions of GP subscribers.

This may come as a surprise to you, but GamePass also exists on PC. As I've said many times, I game on PS5 and PC.

You seem to be under the misconception that gaming is some premium elitist hobby that only the super rich can afford or should be able to afford.

Gaming should be accessible and affordable for everyone, with as few boundaries as possible - and Microsoft and Sony share that view.

SurgicalMenace70d ago

Elitist? Not at all. I just don't get advocating for only the benefit of those who don't want to afford the cost that the market demands. Hell, Sony, MS, and Nintendo are free to charge what they please, but you'll never catch me complaining or expecting access for less. Why stop at gaming? Let's just go at Rolls Royce, Ferrari, Porsche, Aston Martin, Rolex, or the like because why would there be anything outside of the masses affordability? That's not consumer friendly at all, huh? People just want to invest the bare minimum yet get all the benefits. This is the result of the gold star for participation community, with no risk but all the reward. Congrats, champ.😁

Orchard70d ago (Edited 70d ago )

The difference is, Rolls Royce, Ferrari, etc, are trying to be very high end premium products which only the very rich can afford.

PS, Xbox and Switch are obviously not very high end premium products, and the intent of their parent companies is to be as mass market as possible.

It's cute that you think they're in the same class as a Ferrari, but they aren't. And their creators don't want them to be.

SurgicalMenace70d ago

Should be able to afford? According to who? Those not willing to? Sony has $10-20k TVs, $7k cameras, and $5k surround sound systems because they market those product to a class of people who can afford them. Bose, Klipshe, etc are the same. Everything is not meant to be afforded by everyone, these are simple antidotes taught to most as children, I guess some missed the class.

As inflation continues to increase there will be many otherwise normal things out of reach for most as time goes on and gaming will be no different. Ever been to Brazil? There you're considered fortunate if you've got a PS3 and in some regions their still using N64s/PS2s. In America we're fortunate enough to whine about our problems or expect more for less. The cost of gaming is going to eventually outpace the average gamers, the sooner we accept that the better we'll be.

Orchard70d ago (Edited 70d ago )

@Surgical Now you're just talking rubbish.

Just so I understand, Sony who frequently sell their consoles at a loss so more can buy them, and are selling them right now at an 'affordable' price point of $500 - do not intend on their devices being mass market. Nobody tell Surgical that they sold over 100m PS4s in 6 years.

"The cost of gaming is going to eventually outpace the average gamers, the sooner we accept that the better we'll be."

If that happens, the industry dies. The industry as it is today cannot survive on selling 'Ferrari levels' of units. It won't make sense to make a God of War if only 10k people are buying it.

You're living in a fantasy land if you think Sony aren't going after MORE customers, not less. That's also why we'll have cost reduction SKUs, more games on PC, etc.

And with that, you're on your own - I don't partake in fantasies.

IRetrouk68d ago

Not what the ftc said at all.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 68d ago
LoveSpuds72d ago (Edited 72d ago )

I am not so sure Blue88, I mean, Orchard and Co are experts in business acquisitions and international governmental procedures and processes, and they say it will go through.😉

SierraGuy72d ago

It was at this very moment they realized they Fu*ked up.

FinalFantasyFanatic71d ago

I'm seeing alot of resistance lately, so I'll be surprised if this deal does eventually go through, although Microsoft really should try and fix Halo for the next game.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 68d ago
04STIBluByU72d ago

Every week we are getting drip fed more and more stories about this deal. I am in the camp of hoping this deal doesn't go through as it will forever change the future of the industry. MS already has alot of publishers under their belt, they should just make good with them and then down the line buy smaller developers if they feel they need more.

thesoftware73072d ago

I just read it, Nvidia did not challenge anything, and I don't see any statements from Google.

With Stadia's shut down, how would this truly affect google? As a matter of fact it would only help them as the go to phone O/S with GP streaming.

Could they be concerned with King games, games being exclusive to GP?

curtain_swoosh72d ago

im not sure what you read, but its literally in the first three paragraphs

SurgicalMenace71d ago

They can't see what's not convenient. Perhaps if someone else read it for them and charged them $15 monthly, they'd see it.🤣