Feels like we've had peace for years and all of a sudden the daggers are out and all spotlight is on the gaming industry.

Interesting times...

Part of me also thinks that Ballmer/Gates would have never gone this far for Xbox too, I wonder if any of this has opened the eyes of anyone further up the Microsoft chain.

Satya Nadella one month ago: "We should rather look at the console share of Microsoft in Japan. That's a question that somebody should ask and say 'oh I wonder why that is'. That's small. And maybe they (Xbox) should actually start competing more."

Anyone else think the timing of all this seems very deliberate?

I disagree with this.

Independent developers are the sole owners of their work. It is their intelectual property, with their resources and their hard work. They should be 100% free to develop for whatever platform they want. Besides, most small developers out there don't have the man power to optimize a game for every platform that is out there, so often they have to choose one first and then go from there. Not to mention that many times they actually NEED these exclusive deals to even be able to get their games out.

If it's not in the article I was posting, I didn't omit anything. I see nothing in that article about Xbox paying off US politicians. They have almost certainly donated to many politician's campaigns, all the big corporations do, but campaign donations are not quite the same as bribing government officials for quid pro quo benefits, that would be illegal if Microsoft did that.

Xbox is both creating their own big games and acquiring others. They have staffed up most of their studios by a substantial amount over the last few years, some staffing up from AA size to a more AAA capable size. 

It was actually Sony who excluded Nintendo from the market first, not Microsoft. Sony told regulators that Nintendo competes for a different subset of consumers than Playstation and Xbox do, after Xbox cited Switch's success in spite of CoD not releasing on it as proof that Sony doesn't truly need CoD. Their own made up "high-end console market" term is being used against them now. 

Sony did buy a good many studios during the PS2 era, Guerilla, Naughty Dog, Bend Studio, Incognito Entertainment, and Zipper Interactive were acquired by Sony during the 2000-2006 life of PS2. They didn't buy more than they did not because the regulators wouldn't allow it, but because they didn't believe buying more would be a worthwhile investment. At that time Sony still preferred their other divisions to Playstation and were spending more on them, it was shortsighted and cost them somewhat in the long run.

There’s the little spammer I remember.

Honestly though that post was clever satire. I mean, how can you write stuff like "Sony could have bought maaaany the studios in the PS2 era, but didn't - because laws and rules come first in the world." with a straight face. 

I think you misread my comment because I say that moneyhats can still happen, I just want transparency about them.

I'm basically saying if there is an exclusivity agreement then consumers should be told upfront from the start how long for and what platforms they plan on launching on when the exclusivity agreement is over. 1 year cap is more than enough as well but I don't think that would be enforced either.

Japan Has Approved the Deal.

The Japan Fair Trade Commission has established that Microsoft Corporation (corporation number 8700150090374) (hereinafter referred to as "Microsoft Corporation", and the group of companies that have already formed a joint relationship with Microsoft as the ultimate parent company is referred to as the "Microsoft Group") and Activision Blizzard, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Activision"), and the group of companies that have already formed a joint relationship with Activision as the ultimate parent company is referred to as the "Activision Group" (The Activision Group is collectively referred to as the "Party Company Group").

We received submissions from the Parties Group of Plans for Share Acquisition and Merger in accordance with the provisions of the Anti-Monopoly Act, and as a result of examination, since it was recognised that it would not substantially restrain competition in a certain field of trade, the company group was notified to the effect that a cease and desist order would not be issued, and the examination was completed.

(令和5年3月28日)マイクロソフト・コーポレーション及びアクティビジョン・ブリザード・インクの統合に関する審査結果について | 公正取引委員会

Guys I’m sorry but I can’t be an xbot anymore, I’ve decided I’m going to boycott MS so I’ll be returning one of my series x consoles.

I do wonder what Microsoft's game plan is here but I'm seeing a few possible reasons.

1. Set themselves up to acquire a Japanese publisher - I think this is the least likely because Activision-Blizzard will keep them busy for a couple of years, I don't really think that is on their mind yet.

2. Put pressure onto Sony in this newly defined "High-Performance Console Market" - Essentially making it harder for Sony to argue that Microsoft acquisitions will cause an SLC which is how a few regulators, such as the CMA, decide on whether to approve a deal or not.

3. Put pressure onto the FTC in a roundabout way - Essentially slyly pointing out how much dominance that Sony has in Japan and that Japan "protects" that so the Activision-Blizzard deal should go through in America, essentially along the lines of "you should look after your own too"

I think a combination of 2/3 are likely. Especially because we don't know if Japan agrees with this market definition but we know FTC does and we know Sony does so you can use their words against them with other regulators. The FTC is the only one remaining with a Console argument.

These Politicians are specifically talking about Trade Agreements though so I think a few people are losing their minds over nothing, a Politician trying to improve Trade Agreements is like the most common thing ever, it's no different to when any country complains about if they feel their companies are disadvantage in any other sector in another country they have trade deals with.

I don't think Microsoft is expecting Japan to stop Sony from making timed exclusives, Lol.

Whether people like it or not, this merger isn't against any US Law, it doesn't represent an SLC in Console Gaming in both Europe and UK and it doesn't give Microsoft any significant market share dominance, another reason to block the deal. However, Microsoft is using Sony's market share dominance against them in this newly defined market in order to grow their own business, which is a reasonable tactic.

It was Sony's fault that this newly defined console market was even created, it was Microsoft who tried to include Nintendo at first. Now it exists and I don't like that it exists but that is FTC's fault and if EC/CMA also support it then well, tough luck for Sony because it paints a picture of Sony dominance across multiple major markets.

Pointing out that Microsoft is being destroyed in dozens of markets just backs their point up even more than the ABK acquisition should be allowed to go through, Lol. The definition is stupid but it exists and it exists because major regulators agree it exists and Sony encouraged it.

People are losing their dang minds over this

Regulators & Politicians are getting a taste of the "Gamer Console Wars" between those who accuse the regulators of being corrupt over approving the deal to witch hunting against Politicians over straight up lies, caught in the crossfire between Xbox and PlayStation fanboys It's nasty, it's not a good look for the industry, I hope this is over soon.