ReportWire

Tag: Activision Blizzard

  • Pathfinder Developer Bans AI Art, Takes A Hard Stance

    Pathfinder Developer Bans AI Art, Takes A Hard Stance

    [ad_1]

    Image: Paizo

    Between games, art, and even journalism, a lot of industries are dealing with the rise of artificial intelligence removing the human element of creative works. As people have begun using AI and algorithms to create art rather than hiring workers to do it, companies are making hard stances about whether or not they’ll allow work made by these means to be used on their projects. This includes table-top developer Paizo, which has taken a hard stance against AI art being used as art and writing prompts with its products.

    In a post on its website, the Pathfinder and Starfinder developer says it is adding new language to its contracts that will require any work submitted to the company to have been created by a person and not an AI. The statement makes it clear it believes AI art and writing are a “serious threat” to the livelihood of its creative partners and workers, and it wants a human touch in all its products moving forward. This extends to products on the community content marketplace for both Pathfinder and Starfinder.

    “Our customers expect a human touch to our releases, and so long as the ethical and legal circumstances surrounding these programs remains murky and undefined, we are unwilling to associate our brands with the technology in any way.

    Stated plainly—when you buy a Paizo product, you can be sure that it is the work of human professionals who have spent years honing their craft to produce the best work we can. Paizo will not use AI-generated ‘creative’ work of any kind for the foreseeable future.

    We thank the human artists and writers who have been so integral to our success in the past, and we look forward to working with them for many years to come.”

    Paizo and its employees have been central to conversations around labor in the tabletop space, with the studio having formed the first tabletop union back in 2021. The United Paizo Workers allied with the Communications Workers of America, which has had a hand in much of the unionization efforts within the video game industry over at Activision Blizzard.

    [ad_2]

    Kenneth Shepard

    Source link

  • Microsoft enters 10-year agreement with Nvidia and Nintendo in fight to save Activision deal | CNN Business

    Microsoft enters 10-year agreement with Nvidia and Nintendo in fight to save Activision deal | CNN Business

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    Microsoft announced it has agreed to partnerships with Nvidia and Nintendo as it tries to convince European Union officials to approve its $69 billion purchase of Activision Blizzard — the company behind the popular game franchise Call of Duty.

    Microsoft President Brad Smith had a closed-door meeting Tuesday with EU regulators and competitors in Brussels to address concerns that its acquisition of Activision Blizzard could hurt competition in the video game industry. The deal has also come under scrutiny from regulators in the United States and the United Kingdom.

    Microsoft

    (MSFT)
    said that it has entered into a 10-year partnership with Nvidia to bring Xbox PC games to Nvidia’s cloud gaming service. In a statement, the software giant said the partnership “resolves Nvidia’s concerns with Activision Blizzard. Nvidia therefore is offering its full support for regulatory approval of the acquisition.”

    Microsoft also revealed it has finalized a 10-year agreement to bring the latest version of “Call of Duty” to the Nintendo platform once the merger with Activision is completed.

    Smith told CNN’s Richard Quest on Tuesday that “a lot changed today because Microsoft has announced two agreements that together will bring Call of Duty, the game that everyone has been talking about, to 150 million more people on Nintendo devices and Nvidia’s cloud streaming services.” He went on to say these two deals address the concern that Call of Duty will be less available than it is today and will be more available instead due to these two binding agreements.

    “We’re really down to one principal company that is objecting to this deal, and that’s Sony, and we’ve made clear that we’re happy to enter a 10-year agreement with Sony and we’re prepared to enter regulatory obligations as well, whether it’s London or Brussels or Washington,” Smith said. “So, in addition to a contract, we’d have a duty under the law.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Microsoft President Is Carrying That Giant Sony Call of Duty Deal In Pocket, Weirdly

    Microsoft President Is Carrying That Giant Sony Call of Duty Deal In Pocket, Weirdly

    [ad_1]

    Microsoft President Brad Smith
    Photo: Valeria Mongelli / Bloomberg (Getty Images)

    Earlier today, Microsoft President Brad Smith and Xbox boss Phil Spencer talked briefly to the media about its ongoing attempt to consume Activision Blizzard King, continuing once again to act like the larger spat is mostly about Call of Duty. At one point, Smith said he was carrying a contract with him that would keep Call of Duty on PlayStation after the sale goes through, claiming that it all came down to Sony actually signing the thing. Conveniently, he was ignoring that the hold-up on the contract was happening because, y’know, the deal itself–which could potentially have an industry-wide impact that far outstrips Call of Duty.

    For those of you just tuning in, Microsoft has spent the last 12 months trying to buy Activision Blizzard for the astoundingly large amount of $69 billion. However, almost since the moment the deal was announced, regulators and governments around the world, as well as rival companies like Sony, have voiced opposition to the deal. These entities don’t want the deal to go through because it could give Xbox too much power over the industry by owning many of the biggest brands in gaming, such as Starfield and Minecraft (among other issues). And Microsoft has spent the last year jumping from courtroom to courtroom and country to country, trying to convince everyone that one massive corporation buying up another massive corporation is totally good for the industry and not horrible at all. It also keeps trying to get Sony to sign a deal on Call of Duty as a part of these efforts.

    So today—as part of this ongoing worldwide tour of courtrooms and regulatory councils—Microsoft execs were in Brussels, Belgium as part of a behind-closed-doors hearing with the European Commission, which (like many other groups) has concerns about the Activision deal. After that hearing, Smith and Spencer held a brief media…briefing (heh) and mostly went over the same things they’ve said before about how Sony is already dominating the game industry and how Microsoft needs Activision Blizzard to compete. All of these arguments were trotted out while also pointing out that Nintendo had just signed a 10-year deal with the company to bring Call of Duty to Switch, a deal that’s come across as Microsoft trying to prove it won’t keep some of its biggest franchises to itself should the deal go through. And if it’s willing to put forth a decade-long deal on Call of Duty, the thinking goes, Microsoft is clearly not trying to build a monopoly through this deal.

    Read More: Everything That’s Happened In The Activision Blizzard Lawsuit

    It was during this part of the briefing, as reported by GameIndustry.biz, that Smith revealed that he was actually carrying the contract for a similar deal that would keep Call of Duty on PlayStation consoles. It was in an envelope in his pocket.

    “We haven’t agreed on a deal with Sony, but I hope we will,” Smith said, “I hope today is a day that will advance our industry and regulation in a responsible way. Sony can spend all its energy trying to block this deal, which will reduce competition and slow the evolution of the market. Or they can sit down with us, and hammer out a deal.”

    Of course, bringing the actual contract with you on your trip to Europe is clearly just a way to dramatically remind people that Sony isn’t playing ball and is pushing back against the proposed Activision deal over concerns that it could lose access to Call of Duty, a series Sony in the past has called “essential.” And to be clear: Even after signing that deal, Sony could still lose Call of Duty after the initial decade if Xbox doesn’t offer up another, similar contract in 2033. ( It’s also just weird to bring it with you, beyond using it as a prop, unless Smith thought Sony was going to rush the stage at that moment and sign…) And it’s also another example of Microsoft acting like everyone is concerned about Call of Duty just because Sony seems to be focused mostly on that part of the deal.

    In fact, at one point during the briefing, Smith literally said that the “number one concern that people have expressed about this acquisition is that Call of Duty will be less available to people.”

    That’s a wild thing to say! And it just ignores all the other valid issues people and governments have with this deal, like how it could make the industry smaller and more susceptible to collapse, how it could position Game Pass as a more powerful force that could begin to hurt studios that don’t make deals with Xbox, or just the basic reality that—historically speaking— corporate mergers are awful for consumers.

    In other news involving this seemingly-never ending saga, Microsoft also confirmed it had signed a 10-year deal with NVIDIA to allow GeForce NOW players to stream Xbox PC games and Activision PC games, including the all-important CoD, if the deal is approved and happens. This, along with the Nintendo deal, is clearly being promoted heavily by Microsoft, right before today’s hearing, as evidence that the company is not going to lockdown Call of Duty or other Activision Blizzard games to one platform or service.

    Spencer even tweeted about the deal, adding that the company is “committed to bringing more games to more people – however they chose to play.” Well, unless you want to play Bethesda’s next big RPG, Starfield, on a PS5. Then uh…tough luck!

    [ad_2]

    Zack Zwiezen

    Source link

  • Activision Blizzard to ask for 3 days of in-person work

    Activision Blizzard to ask for 3 days of in-person work

    [ad_1]

    Activision Blizzard, the developers behind video games like Call of Duty and World of Warcraft, will demand workers return to the office at least part of the time, joining other tech companies in imposing mandates on in-person work. 

    Employees at Activision Publishing will be expected to return by April 10, while developers at Blizzard Entertainment will return by July 10. Workers at both divisions will be expected to work in-person three days a week. 

    “We look forward to the increased real-time, in-person collaboration and opportunities this change will foster,” the company told several video game outlets on Tuesday. 

    Activision Blizzard, like other tech companies, is a forceful adopter of remote work that is now trying to impose a return to office mandate. 

    Several tech companies, like Apple and Google, announced their own return-to-office plans last year. Last November, Snap said it would ask employees to work in-person at least 80% of the time, starting in February. Other companies, like Disney, Starbucks and Walmart, are also trying to bring workers back to the office for part of the week.

    Activision Blizzard did not immediately respond to Fortune’s request for comment.

    Tweet thread

    Activision’s announcement came a day after a Twitter user identifying as a Blizzard Entertainment employee shared the return-to-office plans and warned they would cause “an exodus of talent” at the gaming company.

    On Monday, Twitter user @LeastMyHairIsOk, who said they worked in Blizzard Entertainment’s customer service department, alleged that Activision Blizzard employees had “no interest in returning to office either full or part time,” due to cost-of-living and health concerns. “This isn’t to say that nobody sees the value in an office environment, but we’ve overall decided the risks do not [outweigh] those benefits.”

    “Leadership isn’t prepared for what is likely to happen—an exodus of talent as we find work elsewhere,” they tweeted.

    Fortune has attempted to contact @LeastMyHairIsOk for comment.

    Activision Blizzard is currently trying to convince regulators to allow Microsoft to acquire the game publisher for $69 billion. Regulators are concerned that the deal would be anti-competitive, as Microsoft may deny popular games like Call of Duty to competitors like Sony’s PlayStation.

    The game developer reported $2.3 billion in net revenue in the most recent quarter, a 7% increase year-on-year. The company declined to give a forecast, due to the pending acquisition by Microsoft. 

    Yet the video game industry is preparing for a slump in demand. Gaming sales boomed as consumers stayed at home during the pandemic, but a return to office work and concerns about inflation are headwinds for video game publishers. 

    Work-from-home in the video game industry

    Employees in the video game industry, who often work long hours with poor job security, embraced work-from-home during the pandemic. Around half of video game workers believed that companies would keep work-from-home options into the future, according to a 2021 survey from the Independent Games Developers Association.

    Yet companies also blamed the rapid shift to remote work for disrupting game development, as employees struggled to get access to systems and resources from their homes, forcing game delays throughout the pandemic. 

    Research from Harvard Business Review in 2021 found that public game companies that shifted to remote work reported 4.4 times more delays than before the pandemic, while companies that did not shift to remote work reported fewer delays than before COVID-19. 

    Learn how to navigate and strengthen trust in your business with The Trust Factor, a weekly newsletter examining what leaders need to succeed. Sign up here.

    [ad_2]

    Nicholas Gordon

    Source link

  • Sony Accuses Microsoft Of ‘Harassment’ In Court Battle

    Sony Accuses Microsoft Of ‘Harassment’ In Court Battle

    [ad_1]

    Screenshot: Phoenix Wright (PS4)

    Microsoft’s struggles to get its proposed $69 billion purchase of Activision Blizzard over the line aren’t just playing out at government watchdogs and in the public eye, but in courtrooms as well. And in one of those battlegrounds, Microsoft is making demands of its rival Sony that the latter say constitute “obvious harassment”.

    Via Axios’ newsletter, a series of court documents have been filed over the last couple of weeks detailing some of the legal skirmishes currently playing out between Microsoft, who want to complete the blockbuster deal, and Sony, who are one of a number of companies and organisations who absolutely do not want this to happen.

    These particular filings are about Sony’s attempts to fight the proposed sale, and that as part of their defence Microsoft is entitled to “discovery”, which is basically just letting them get hold of a load of documents and emails from certain Sony executives. Both companies have been haggling over the number of executives this will include and the scope of the discovery for ages, but things took a turn earlier this month when Microsoft accused Sony of first stalling, and then not providing all the information they might need:

    Sony Interactive Entertainment (“SIE”)—whose gaming business has dwarfed Xbox’s for 20 years—is not an ordinary third party in this action. At great expense and over an extended period, SIE has deployed delegations of executives, large teams of outside lawyers, and highpriced economists to persuade regulators here and around the world to block Microsoft Corp.’s

    (“Microsoft’s”) proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard King. SIE’s efforts are paying off: The FTC’s complaint in this action is chock-full of allegations about the effects the deal will have on SIE’s business. This case is as much about SIE as it is about Xbox and Activision. Timely discovery from SIE is therefore critical to Microsoft’s defense.

    Though SIE’s motion for an extension of time complains about the breadth of the subpoena and the length of the extensions already granted for it to respond to that subpoena, Microsoft already told SIE it would consent to a fourth extension of time to negotiate issues related to the scope of the subpoena’s requests. But Microsoft believes that court intervention is required now on one issue: whether SIE will collect and produce documents from certain custodians.

    In response, Sony said that they hadn’t supplied all the information Microsoft were requesting because they were being asked for way too much, including things like access to internal performance reviews, something Sony say “is obvious harassment”, and that “even in employment cases courts require a specific showing of relevance before requiring production of personnel files.”

    Judge D. Michael Chappell has agreed with Sony, saying the company “has demonstrated good cause for the requested relief” and agreeing that the scope and depth of Microsoft’s requests had gone too far.

    All of which is only mildly interesting, I know, but I bring this up mostly so we can just link to both Microsoft and Sony’s motions, which are full of some incredible self-owns, like Microsoft saying PlayStation’s success “has dwarfed Xbox’s for 20 years”, along with some very funny wordage in Sony’s filing, like the way they say Microsoft’s subpoena was, like, “truly massive”.

    [ad_2]

    Luke Plunkett

    Source link

  • What To Expect From Xbox In 2023

    What To Expect From Xbox In 2023

    [ad_1]

    Image: Bethesda

    Easily the most anticipated title on this list, Starfield is notable for two reasons: It’s gaming’s next big sci-fi RPG epic and its the next evolution in Bethesda’s open-world formula. Bethesda is no stranger to science fiction, having a number of Fallout games under its belt. But from everything we know about Starfield right now, it’s aiming for an unprecedented scale, featuring over 1,000 worlds for you to explore.

    Though we haven’t seen a whole lot of Starfield gameplay, the reveal last summer showed a bit of what we can expect. Here’s your hype fuel for Starfield before its expected release this year:

    • “Hard science fiction” setting with 1,000 explorable planets
    • A mix of “handcrafted content” and procedurally-generated environments
    • More than 250,000 lines of dialogue in classic “Bethesda-style,” and a “persuasion system”
    • Complex character creation system with various backgrounds and traits that let you tailor your aesthetics and stats
    • Simplified survival mechanics
    • The classic Bethesda mix of first-person combat, exploration, and roleplaying

    Bethesda

    It’s hard not to get excited about a game like this. While the commonly voiced concern that such a high number of planets may mean we’re in for some serious “quantity over quality” is a fair one, I’d argue that’s always been the case with Bethesda games: Unprecedented scale, unprecedented jank. Despite all of that, Bethesda games of this sort usually cohere to form a unified experience that’s hard to get anywhere else. The question for Starfield will be: Do enough aspects of this epic space sim work well enough to create an intense level of immersion for, oh I dunno, hundreds of hours? I mean, I still don’t feel like I saw everything in Fallout 3 and 4.

    [ad_2]

    Claire Jackson

    Source link

  • Phil Spencer Says Halo Studio Remains ‘Critical’ To Xbox Despite Cuts

    Phil Spencer Says Halo Studio Remains ‘Critical’ To Xbox Despite Cuts

    [ad_1]

    Image: 343 Industries / Microsoft

    Things haven’t been going great for Xbox recently. Microsoft is facing stiff resistance in its attempt to acquire Activision Blizzard. It released hardly any big exclusive blockbusters last year. And it just cut over 10,000 jobs last week, including many senior developers at Halo Infinite studio 343 Industries. Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer tried to remain upbeat and do damage control on each of these points and more in a new interview with IGN.

    “Every year is critical,” he said. “I don’t find this year to be more or less critical. I feel good about our momentum. Obviously, we’re going through some adjustments right now that are painful, but I think necessary, but it’s really to set us up and the teams for long-term success.”

    This week captured both the peril and promise facing Xbox right now. On Tuesday, Microsoft announced a drop in net-income of 12 percent for the most recent fiscal quarter compared to the prior year. Xbox gaming hardware and software were down by similar percentages, and Microsoft said nothing about how many new subscribers its Game Pass service had gained since it crossed the 25 million mark exactly a year ago.

    Then on Wednesday Microsoft provided a sleek and streamlined look at its upcoming games in a Developer Direct livestream copied right from the Nintendo playbook. Forza Motorsport was seemingly quietly delayed to the second half of the year, but looked like a beautiful and impressive racing sim showpiece. Arkane’s co-op sandbox vampire shooter Redfall got a May 2 release date. Real-time strategy spin-off Minecraft Legends will hit in April. And to cap things off Tango Gameworks, maker of The Evil Within, shadow-dropped Hi-Fi Rush on Game Pass, a colorful rhythm-action game from left field that’s already become the first undisputed gaming hit of 2023.

    Hi-Fi Rush's hero jumps through a colorful city skyline.

    Screenshot: Tango Gameworks / Bethesda

    “2022 was too light on games,” Spencer confessed in his IGN interview. 2023 shouldn’t be thanks to Redfall and Starfield, Bethesda’s much-anticipated answer to the question, “What if Skyrim but space?” But both of those games were technically supposed to come out last year. Meanwhile, Hi-Fi Rush, like Obsidian’s Pentiment before it, is shaping up to be a critically acclaimed Game Pass release that still might be too small to move the needle on Xbox’s larger fortunes.

    Spencer remained vague when asked how successful these games were or their impact on Game Pass, whose growth has reportedly stalled on console. “I think that the creative diversity expands for us when we have different ways for people to kind of pay for the games that they’re playing, and the subscription definitely helps there,” he said.

    Hi-Fi Rush, Redfall, Starfield, and a new The Elder Scrolls Online expansion due out in June are also all from Bethesda, which Microsoft finished acquiring in 2021. The older Microsoft first-party game studios have either remained relatively quiet in recent years while working on their next big projects, or, in the case of 343 Industries, were recently hit with a surprising number of layoffs.

    Following news of the cuts last week, rumors and speculation began to swirl that 343 Industries—which shipped a well-received Halo Infinite single-player campaign in 2021, but struggled with seasonal updates for the multiplayer component in the months since—was being benched. The studio put out a brief statement over the weekend saying Halo was here to stay and that it would continue developing it.

    A shift from Starfield waits for the game's new release date.

    Image: Bethesda / Microsoft

    Spencer doubled down on that in his interview with IGN, but provided little insight into the reasoning behind the layoffs or what its plans were for the franchise moving forward. “What we’re doing now is we want to make sure that leadership team is set up with the flexibility to build the plan that they need to go build,” he said. “And Halo will remain critically important to what Xbox is doing, and 343 is critically important to the success of Halo.”

    Where Halo Infinite’s previously touted “10-year” plan fits into that, however, remains unclear. “They’ve got some other things, some rumored, some announced, that they’ll be working on,” Spencer said. And on the future of the series as a whole he simply said, “I expect that we’ll be continuing to support and grow Halo for as long as the Xbox is a platform for people to play.” It’s hard to imagine Nintendo talking about Mario with a similar-sounding lack of conviction.

    It’s possible Microsoft’s continued struggles with some of its internal projects is partly why it’s so focused on looking outside the company for help. Currently that means trying to acquire Activision Blizzard for $69 billion and fighting off an antitrust lawsuit by the Federal trade Commission in the process. Microsoft had originally promised the deal to get Call of Duty, Diablo, World of Warcraft, and Candy Crush would be wrapped up before the end of summer 2023. That deadline’s coming up quickly, even as the company continues offering compromises, like reportedly giving Sony the option to continue paying to have Activision’s games on its rival Game Pass subscription service, PS Plus.

    Spencer told IGN he remains bullish on closing the deal, despite claiming to have known nothing about the logistics of doing so when he started a year ago. “Given a year ago, for me, I didn’t know anything about the process of doing an acquisition like this,” he said. “The fact that I have more insight, more knowledge about what it means to work with the different regulatory boards, I’m more confident now than I was a year ago, simply based on the information I have and the discussions that we’ve been having.”

    [ad_2]

    Ethan Gach

    Source link

  • ‘I cried all night’: Millions of Chinese lose access to ‘World of Warcraft’ and other hit games | CNN Business

    ‘I cried all night’: Millions of Chinese lose access to ‘World of Warcraft’ and other hit games | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Hong Kong
    CNN
     — 

    Millions of players in China have lost access to the iconic “World of Warcraft” franchise and other popular video games, as Blizzard Entertainment’s servers in the country went offline after two decades.

    The company’s services in China were suspended at midnight local time on Tuesday, marking the end of an era for fans, after a licensing agreement with longtime local partner NetEase

    (NTES)
    expired.

    “World of Warcraft,” also known as “WoW,” is a hugely popular online multiplayer game that allows users to fight monsters and journey through expeditions in the medieval world of Azeroth.

    Many gamers around the world have grown up with the smash hit, including in China. That was underscored in recent days, as Chinese fans expressed their disbelief over the loss of their longtime pastime in social media posts.

    “When I woke up, I still didn’t want to accept [it],” one user said on Weibo, China’s Twitter-like platform, on Tuesday. “I cried all night in my sleep because the game went offline. I dreamed that I was crying in the middle of the class.”

    Another player described “World of Warcraft” as “my first love.”

    “I really can’t forget it,” they wrote.

    The suspension follows a bitter dispute between Blizzard, a unit of Activision Blizzard

    (ATVI)
    , and NetEase.

    Foreign publishers must work with local partners to offer video games in China. Last November, however, Blizzard and NetEase announced they would not renew licensing agreements that were set to expire this month.

    Those deals had covered the publication of several popular Blizzard titles in mainland China, including “World of Warcraft,” “Hearthstone,” and “Diablo III,” since 2008. In separate statements at the time, both sides said they were unable to reach a new agreement on key terms, without giving further details.

    Now, the discussions appear to have gotten more acrimonious.

    In a statement last Tuesday, Blizzard said it had reached out to NetEase to seek “their help in exploring a six-month extension to the current agreement.”

    The US company said it had appealed to NetEase to let fans continue playing uninterrupted, “based on our personal feelings as gamers, and the frustration expressed to us by Chinese players.”

    “Unfortunately, after renewed discussions last week, NetEase did not accept our proposal for an extension,” Blizzard said.

    NetEase hit back with its own statement last week.

    In unusually terse comments, the Chinese tech and gaming giant accused Blizzard of blindsiding it with its “sudden statement” and called the US company’s proposal “outrageous, inappropriate, and not in line with business logic.”

    NetEase also pointed out that Blizzard had already “started the work of finding new partners” in China, putting the Hangzhou-based company in an “unfair” position.

    The public spat marked an unexpected twist in the companies’ 14-year partnership.

    Under a separate agreement, the companies are working together on the joint development and publishing of “Diablo Immortal,” another widely followed multiplayer game that allows users to slay demons in an ancient world. NetEase said in a statement in November that this collaboration would continue.

    Blizzard said in December that “World of Warcraft” fans would be able to back up their playing history and ensure all progress was saved as it wound down its agreement and looked for a new partner.

    This week’s shutdown has been emotional, even for senior leadership at NetEase.

    In a LinkedIn post Monday, Simon Zhu, president of global investments and partnerships of NetEase Games, detailed how he grew up with Blizzard games in China, including older “Warcraft” and “Diablo” titles.

    “Only [a] few hours before Blizzard Games servers shut down in China, and that is a very very big deal for players in China,” he wrote.

    “Today is such a sad moment to witness the server shutdown, and we don’t know how things will play out in the future. The biggest victim would be players in China who live and breathe in those worlds.”

    Activision Blizzard, which previously had another Chinese partner before teaming up with NetEase, said it is continuing its search for a new distribution partner.

    “Our commitment to players on mainland China remains strong as we continue to work with Tencent to distribute ‘Call of Duty: Mobile,’ as well as continue active talks with potential partners to resume gameplay for Blizzard’s iconic franchises,” an Activision Blizzard spokesperson told CNN.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Xbox’s Phil Spencer Says Microsoft’s 10K Layoffs ‘Hurts’ In Email To Staff

    Xbox’s Phil Spencer Says Microsoft’s 10K Layoffs ‘Hurts’ In Email To Staff

    [ad_1]

    Photo: Patrick T. Fallon (Getty Images)

    A few hours ago, Xbox CEO Phil Spencer sent out a company-wide email to all full-time employees under Microsoft’s gaming divisions. A copy of the email was shared with Kotaku by a current Xbox employee, we have confirmed its authenticity, and the full text has been transcribed below:

    This has been a difficult week across Microsoft, and here, inside our teams. Now that many of the 1:1 and team conversations have happened, I want to take a moment to reiterate the message that you heard from your leaders.

    This is a challenging moment in our business, and this week’s actions were painful choices. The Gaming Leadership Team had to make decisions that we felt set us up for the long-term success of our products and business, but the individual results of those decisions are real. I know that hurts. Thank you for supporting our colleagues as they process these changes.

    Over the coming weeks we will have many opportunities to connect and answer your questions, including the Monthly Gaming Update next week for teams who attend that meeting, and I am in close contact with teams at ZeniMax to provide support. The GLT and I are committed to being as transparent as we can. Moving forward with ambiguity is challenging, but I am confident that together, we will get through this difficult moment in time.

    Xbox has a long history of success thanks to the work you do in service of players, creators, and each other. Your work is so deeply appreciated and valued in these times of change and is integral to our business momentum. I am confident in our future and proud to be part of this team, but also conscious that this is a challenging time and I want to thank you for everything you do here.

    Phil

    On January 18, Microsoft laid off 10,000 employees across the company. These layoffs included gaming studios such as 343 Industries, The Coalition, ZeniMax Media, and Bethesda Game Studios. Xbox has struggled to release first-party titles last year, and is under tremendous pressure to ship flashy blockbuster titles such as Starfield. Some of the people who have lost their jobs include senior talent, and occurred a year after the publisher scourged up the pocket change to purchase Activision Blizzard for $70 billion. Kotaku has reached out to Microsoft for a statement, but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

    “This feels like something you send out on obligation,” wrote a current employee at Xbox over text messages to Kotaku. “I seriously doubt any of those monthly gaming updates or other meetings are going to do anything to make anyone feel better.”

    The tech workers’ union CODE-CWA put out a statement on January 19, stating that their representatives have been in contact with Microsoft. The company “recognizes its obligation to bargain over any proposed layoffs of CWA members at ZeniMax.” The ZeniMax union intends to negotiate on “alternatives to layoffs.”

    [ad_2]

    Sisi Jiang

    Source link

  • Oops: Microsoft Called FTC Unconstitutional, Regrets The Error

    Oops: Microsoft Called FTC Unconstitutional, Regrets The Error

    [ad_1]

    A photo shows two people as they walk by a Microsoft logo on a grey wall.

    Photo: Zed Jameson/Bloomberg (Getty Images)

    Today, Microsoft filed a revised response to the United States Federal Trade Commission’s lawsuit intended to stop the tech giant from buying up Call of Duty publisher Activision. The initial filing contained multiple arguments claiming the FTC itself and its court system were unconstitutional. But now Microsoft has yanked that language out of the doc and claimed it was all a mistake. Y’know, just your average oopsie of calling a large government agency unconstitutional.

    Last year, Microsoft announced its plans to consume Call of Duty and World of Warcraft publisher Activision Blizzard for a whopping $69 billion. Since then, Microsoft and Activision Blizzard have faced pushback and legal roadblocks around the world as various government agencies and regulatory committees investigate if the massive deal would give Microsoft an unfair advantage against its competitors. As you would expect, Microsoft and Activision Blizzard have fought back and spent 2022, filing responses, docs, and court paperwork in an effort to make its deal happen.

    In a press release put out by the FTC last month, the agency announced a lawsuit against the merger and reasoned that Microsoft would be able to stifle its competitors by making games Xbox exclusives and manipulating prices, should the deal go through. Microsoft fought back via a response that contained a lot of arguments, including the assertion that the FTC itself was actually unconstitutional.

    However, as reported by Axios, today Microsoft refiled its response to the lawsuit and has omitted the section arguing that the FTC’s lawsuit was “invalid because the structure of the Commission as an independent agency that wields significant executive power” violates Article II of the US Constitution. In that same section of the original filing, Microsoft also argued that the lawsuit and legal proceedings being carried out by the FTC were “invalid” because the FTC’s official complaint violated Article III of the U.S. Constitution. Oh, and Microsoft’s legal team also claimed that the FTC’s “procedures” violated the company’s “right to Equal Protection under the Fifth Amendment.”

    Read More: Gamers Are Suing Microsoft To Thwart Its Merger With Activision

    Now all of that is gone and Microsoft tells Axios that it probably shouldn’t have been in that initial doc in the first place.

    “The FTC has an important mission to protect competition and consumers, and we quickly updated our response to omit language suggesting otherwise based on the constitution,” Microsoft public affairs spokesperson David Cuddy told Axios. “We initially put all potential arguments on the table internally and should have dropped these defenses before we filed.”

    Microsoft says it appreciates all the “feedback” it received about its arguments claiming the FTC itself was unconstitutional and are “engaging directly with those who expressed concerns” to make the company’s position on the matter “clear.” In other words, the FTC probably didn’t take too kindly to be called unconstitutional and you probably shouldn’t anger the people suing you and trying to stop your whole big merger from happening.

    Axios reports that Activision is also dropping similar allegations it had included in its own, separate response to the same FTC lawsuit. 

    [ad_2]

    Zack Zwiezen

    Source link

  • Microsoft heads for battle with FTC over $68.7B Activision Blizzard deal

    Microsoft heads for battle with FTC over $68.7B Activision Blizzard deal

    [ad_1]

    Microsoft is headed for a battle with the U.S. government over whether regulators will block the tech giant’s planned takeover of video game company Activision Blizzard.

    Microsoft on Thursday filed a formal response to the Federal Trade Commission’s claims that the $68.7 billion deal is an illegal acquisition that should be stopped.

    After years of avoiding the political backlash that has been directed at big tech peers such as Amazon and Google, the software giant now appears to be on a collision course with U.S. regulators emboldened by President Joe Biden’s push to get tough on anti-competitive behavior.

    The FTC claims the merger could violate antitrust laws by suppressing competitors to Microsoft’s Xbox game console and its growing Xbox Game Pass subscription business.

    Tug of war over Call of Duty game

    At the center of the dispute is Microsoft’s rivalry with PlayStation maker Sony to secure popular Activision Blizzard franchises like the military shooter game Call of Duty.

    Microsoft’s response to the FTC tries to downplay Xbox’s role in the industry, describing itself as the “third-place manufacturer of gaming consoles” behind Sony and Nintendo, and one of just many publishers of popular video games with “next to no presence in mobile gaming,” where it is trying to make gains.

    Activision Blizzard filed its own rebuttal to the FTC complaint on Thursday criticizing what it described as the FTC’s “unfounded assumption” that Microsoft would want to withhold Call of Duty from platforms that compete with Xbox. Activision CEO Bobby Kotick said he believes the companies will prevail.

    The dispute could be a difficult test case for Biden-appointed FTC Chair Lina Khan, who has sought to strengthen enforcement of antitrust rules. The FTC voted 3-1 earlier in December to issue the complaint seeking to block the deal, with Khan and the two other Democratic commissioners voting in favor and the sole Republican voting against.

    The deal is also under close scrutiny in the European Union and the United Kingdom, where investigations aren’t due to be completed until next year.

    With Activision ownership comes monopoly power

    The FTC’s complaint points to Microsoft’s 2021 acquisition of well-known game developer Bethesda Softworks and its parent company ZeniMax, as an example of where Microsoft is making some upcoming game titles exclusive to Xbox despite assuring European regulators it had no intention to do so.

    Microsoft on Thursday objected to the FTC’s characterization, saying it made clear to European regulators it would “approach exclusivity for future game titles on a case-by-case basis, which is exactly what it has done.”

    The FTC’s suit describes top-selling franchises like Call of Duty as important because they develop a base of loyal users attached to their preferred console or streaming service.

    “With control of Activision’s content, Microsoft would have the ability and increased incentive to withhold or degrade Activision’s content in ways that substantially lessen competition — including competition on product quality, price, and innovation,” the FTC lawsuit says. “This loss of competition would likely result in significant harm to consumers in multiple markets at a pivotal time for the industry.”

    Microsoft signaled that it will vigorously fight the case in court with a team led by high-profile corporate attorney Beth Wilkinson, while also leaving open the possibility of a settlement.

    “Even with confidence in our case, we remain committed to creative solutions with regulators that will protect competition, consumers, and workers in the tech sector,” said Microsoft’s president, Brad Smith, in a statement Thursday. “As we’ve learned from our lawsuits in the past, the door never closes on the opportunity to find an agreement that can benefit everyone.”

    Previous antitrust battle

    Microsoft’s last big antitrust battle occurred more than two decades ago when a federal judge ordered its breakup following the company’s anticompetitive actions related to its dominant Windows software. That verdict was overturned on appeal, although the court imposed other penalties on the company.

    The FTC’s decision to send the complaint to its in-house Administrative Law Judge D. Michael Chappell instead of seeking an urgent federal court injunction to halt the merger could drag the case out at least until August, when the first evidence hearing is scheduled. Microsoft’s agreement with Activision Blizzard requires it to pay the video game company a breakup fee of up to $3 billion if it can’t close the deal before July 18.

    The timing and trajectory of the case could change depending on how regulators in the U.K. and Europe rule on the merger next year. If Microsoft wins approval in Europe, it could use that to try to expedite the process in U.S. courts.

    The merger faced yet another challenge this week from a group of individual video game players who sued in a San Francisco federal court to stop the deal on antitrust grounds.

    The plaintiffs, all fans of Activision Blizzard’s Call of Duty franchise and other popular titles such as World of Warcraft, Overwatch and Diablo, are particularly concerned about how the consolidation would affect future game quality, innovation and output, said their attorney Joseph Alioto.

    “When there’s a lack of competition, the quality necessarily goes down,” Alioto said. “By eliminating Activision, it gives such a strong position to Microsoft that they can do whatever they want.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Congress Wants To Know What The Biggest Game Companies Are Doing To ‘Combat Extremism’

    Congress Wants To Know What The Biggest Game Companies Are Doing To ‘Combat Extremism’

    [ad_1]

    Image for article titled Congress Wants To Know What The Biggest Game Companies Are Doing To 'Combat Extremism'

    Photo: Mark Wilson (Getty Images)

    A group of seven lawmakers are sending a letter to the world’s biggest video game companies tomorrow, asking each of them what steps they’re taking to combat “harassment and extremism” in online video games.

    As Axios reports, the seven Democratic representatives—including Lori Trahan (Massachusetts), Katie Porter (California) and Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon—have all co-signed a letter, which is looking to “better understand the processes you have in place to handle player reports of harassment and extremism encounters in your online games, and ask for consideration of safety measures pertaining to anti-harassment and anti-extremism”.

    Unsurprisingly, the list includes companies like Activision Blizzard (Call of Duty, Overwatch), Microsoft (Xbox), Sony (PlayStation), Roblox, Take-Two Interactive (Grand Theft Auto, NBA 2K), Riot Games (League of Legends, Valorant), Epic (Fortnite) and Electronic Arts (Battlefield, FIFA & Madden).

    Those are all massive international companies, most of them with thousands of employees spread out all over the world, and responsible for some of the planet’s most popular and enduring online games. To want to grill them, when so many of them are based in the US—or at least most popular in the US—is a pretty obvious move!

    Hilariously, though, whoever put the list together of which companies to target has clearly just gone down a list of “most popular games”, not “biggest companies”, because among those titans of industry are Innersloth, the developers of Among Us.

    Among Us may be a huge hit, but Innersloth are also a tiny team. How tiny? This tiny:

    Among Us Wins Best Mobile Game at The Game Awards 2020

    Innsersloth’s webiste says the studio currently has 20 employees. I don’t know how much they’re going to be able to explain when their game has you playing as a cute little astronaut, doesn’t have voice chat and only lets players communicate via a menu of pre-written lines.

    But then nobody has to legally reply to the letter at all, it’s just a letter, so maybe they can just reply “sorry, think this is meant for Xbox!” and get on with their day.

    [ad_2]

    Luke Plunkett

    Source link

  • FTC moves to block $69 billion Microsoft-Activision deal

    FTC moves to block $69 billion Microsoft-Activision deal

    [ad_1]

    Federal regulators are seeking to block Microsoft’s proposed purchase of video game powerhouse Activision Blizzard, the Federal Trade Commission said Thursday. The $69 billion deal — the largest ever for Microsoft and for the gaming industry as a whole — would undermine competition for the software giant’s Xbox gaming console, the agency said.

    “Microsoft has already shown that it can and will withhold content from its gaming rivals,” Holly Vedova, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition, said in a statement. 

    The FTC cited Microsoft’s recent purchase of ZeniMax, parent company of software developer Bethesda Softworks, after which Microsoft decided to make several Bethesda titles, including Starfield and Redfall, exclusive to its consoles. 

    The FTC voted 3-1 to file a lawsuit to stop the deal, with the three Democratic commissioners voting in favor and the sole Republican voting against. A fifth seat on the panel is vacant after another Republican left earlier this year.

    The FTC noted that Activision, maker of bestselling games such as Call of Duty and World of Warcraft, was among “a very small number of top video game developers” that publish titles for multiple devices, including consoles, PCs and mobile. Globally, some 154 million people play the company’s games every month, the FTC said.

    With Microsoft in control of Activision, the software maker “would have both the means and incentive” to raise prices, issue lower-quality games or keep content off other platforms altogether, the agency said.

    Microsoft defended the transaction, saying in a statement that the deal “will expand competition and create more opportunities for gamers and game developers.”

    “While we believed in giving peace a chance, we have complete confidence in our case and welcome the opportunity to present our case in court,” the statement said.

    Activision CEO Bobby Kotick express confidence the companies would prevail in court and complete the deal. “The allegation that this deal is anti-competitive doesn’t align with the facts, and we believe we’ll win this challenge,” he said in a statement.

    “Dodgy deals”

    The Biden administration has emphasized the importance of competition in the economy. Current antitrust leaders “have staked out the view that for decades merger policy has been too weak and they’ve said, repeatedly, ‘We’re changing that,’” William Kovacic, a former chair of the FTC, told the Associated Press.

    The goal is to “not allow dodgy deals and not accept weak settlements,” said Kovacic, who was a Republican commissioner appointed in 2006 by then-President George W. Bush. But he said Microsoft has a good chance of winning its legal challenge.

    “It’s evident that the company has been making a number of concessions,” he said. “Microsoft would likely raise them in court and say the FTC is being incorrigibly stubborn about this.”

    Microsoft announced the merger deal in January but faced months of resistance from Sony, which makes the competing PlayStation console and has raised concerns with antitrust watchdogs that it would lose access to popular Activision Blizzard game franchises such as Call of Duty. 

    The company’s latest concession, announced Wednesday, was to make Call of Duty available on Nintendo devices for 10 years should its acquisition go through. It has said it tried to offer the same commitment to Sony.

    Union friendly?

    In an appeal to Biden administration priorities, Microsoft has also sought to characterize its deal as worker-friendly after announcing a “labor neutrality agreement” in June with the Communications Workers of America that would allow workers to unionize after the acquisition closes. 

    Technology companies historically have shown little support for employees seeking to organize. Workers at two Activision Blizzard divisions also recently voted to unionize, but the company has fought those efforts.

    In a statement, the CWA said allowing the deal to close “would have sent a game-changing message to corporate America that workers do indeed have a seat at the table and their concerns matter and must be addressed.”

    “Workers across the country, including in the video game industry, understand that one of the most effective ways to fight consolidated corporate power is to consolidate their own power by joining together in unions,” the CWA said.

    The deal is also under close scrutiny in the European Union and the United Kingdom, where investigations aren’t due to be completed until next year.

    The Associated Press contributed reporting.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FTC sues to block Microsoft’s $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard | CNN Business

    FTC sues to block Microsoft’s $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    Washington
    CNN
     — 

    The Federal Trade Commission on Thursday sued to block Microsoft’s $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard, challenging one of the largest tech acquisitions in history.

    The administrative complaint filed Thursday by the FTC alleges that the blockbuster deal, which would make Microsoft the third-largest video game publisher in the world, would give Microsoft “both the means and motive to harm competition” — claiming it could negatively affect prices of video games as well as game quality and player experiences on consoles and gaming services, according to an agency release.

    “We continue to believe that this deal will expand competition and create more opportunities for gamers and game developers,” Brad Smith, Microsoft’s president, said in a statement Thursday. “We have been committed since Day One to addressing competition concerns, including by offering earlier this week proposed concessions to the FTC. While we believed in giving peace a chance, we have complete confidence in our case and welcome the opportunity to present our case in court.”

    In an email sent to employees and provided to CNN, Activision CEO Bobby Kotick said the FTC suit may sound “alarming” but he remains confident the deal will close. “The allegation that this deal is anti-competitive doesn’t align with the facts, and we believe we’ll win this challenge,” he said.

    The US merger challenge reflects the biggest setback yet for Microsoft as it has aggressively courted regulators around the world in hopes of persuading them to bless the deal. It also marks the FTC’s most significant challenge to the tech industry since it sued to break up Facebook-owner Meta in 2020, underscoring US officials’ vocal promises of a tough antitrust enforcement agenda.

    “Today we seek to stop Microsoft from gaining control over a leading independent game studio and using it to harm competition in multiple dynamic and fast-growing gaming markets,” said Holly Vedova, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition, in a statement.

    Microsoft’s proposed deal would give it control over key video game franchises, including “Call of Duty,” “World of Warcraft” and more.

    Officials in the United Kingdom and the European Union have also scrutinized the deal as potentially anticompetitive. But the FTC complaint marks the first attempt by an antitrust regulator to block the deal outright.

    Microsoft could use its ownership over Activision titles to raise prices, or to try to funnel players to gaming platforms it controls, such as Xbox or Windows, the FTC said. The deal could also affect the emerging market for cloud-based gaming services, the FTC said, which Microsoft is involved with through its subscription service, Xbox Game Pass.

    In recent days, Microsoft has announced a slew of partnerships apparently intended to head off claims that it would withhold gaming content from rivals. This week, Microsoft said it had reached a 10-year deal with Nintendo ensuring that it will have access to Call of Duty for the foreseeable future.

    In a Wall Street Journal op-ed Monday, Microsoft’s Smith said an FTC suit to block the Activision deal would be a “huge mistake” and added that the acquisition would allow Microsoft to innovate new features such as the ability for consumer to play the same game on multiple devices, just as they can with streaming TV shows or music.

    Months earlier, in February, Microsoft made an 11-point pledge related to all of its app marketplaces and its gaming business. The list included a promise, which would cover the proposed Activision deal, not to give preferential treatment to its own published games on digital marketplaces it runs.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • FTC Sues To Block Microsoft-Activision Blizzard $69 Billion Merger

    FTC Sues To Block Microsoft-Activision Blizzard $69 Billion Merger

    [ad_1]

    The Federal Trade Commission said Thursday it is suing to block Microsoft’s planned $69 billion takeover of video game company Activision Blizzard, saying it could suppress competitors to its Xbox game consoles and its growing games subscription business.

    The FTC voted 3-1 to issue the complaint after a closed-door meeting, with the three Democratic commissioners voting in favor and the sole Republican voting against. A fifth seat on the panel is vacant after another Republican left earlier this year.

    The FTC’s complaint points to Microsoft’s previous game acquisitions, especially of well-known developer Bethesda Softworks and its parent company ZeniMax, as an example of where Microsoft made some popular game titles exclusive despite assuring European regulators it had no intention to do so.

    “Microsoft has already shown that it can and will withhold content from its gaming rivals,” said a prepared statement from Holly Vedova, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition. “Today we seek to stop Microsoft from gaining control over a leading independent game studio and using it to harm competition in multiple dynamic and fast-growing gaming markets.”

    Microsoft’s president, Brad Smith, suggested in a statement Thursday that the company is likely to challenge the FTC’s decision.

    “While we believed in giving peace a chance, we have complete confidence in our case and welcome the opportunity to present our case in court,” Smith said.

    The FTC’s challenge ― which is being filed in an administrative court ― could be a test case for President Joe Biden’s mandate to scrutinize big tech mergers.

    Microsoft had been ramping up its public defense of the deal in recent days as it awaited a decision.

    Microsoft announced the merger deal in January but has faced months of resistance from Sony, which makes the competing PlayStation console and has raised concerns with antitrust watchdogs around the world about losing access to popular Activision Blizzard game franchises such as Call of Duty.

    Antitrust regulators under Biden “have staked out the view that for decades merger policy has been too weak and they’ve said, repeatedly, ‘We’re changing that,’” said William Kovacic, a former chair of the FTC.

    The goal is to “not allow dodgy deals and not accept weak settlements,” said Kovacic, who was a Republican commissioner appointed in 2006 by then-President George W. Bush. But he said trying to block this acquisition could trigger a legal challenge from Microsoft that the company has a good chance of winning,

    “It’s evident that the company has been making a number of concessions,” he said. “If the FTC turns down Microsoft’s commitments, Microsoft would likely raise them in court and say the FTC is being incorrigibly stubborn about this.”

    Microsoft announced its latest promise Wednesday, saying it would make Call of Duty available on Nintendo devices for 10 years should its acquisition go through. It has said it tried to offer the same commitment to Sony.

    The deal is also under close scrutiny in the European Union and the United Kingdom, where investigations aren’t due to be completed until next year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Microsoft says it has reached a 10-year deal to bring ‘Call of Duty’ to Nintendo | CNN Business

    Microsoft says it has reached a 10-year deal to bring ‘Call of Duty’ to Nintendo | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN Business
     — 

    Fans of the popular first-person shooter game “Call of Duty” may soon have more options for where they can play it.

    Microsoft said late Tuesday it has reached a 10-year deal to bring the 19-year-old game franchise to Nintendo after its acquisition of Activision Blizzard, which makes the game, is completed. The deal is pending regulatory approval.

    The news came one day after Microsoft president Brad Smith wrote in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece that the Redmond, Washington-based company offered a 10-year contract for “Call of Duty” to work with Sony’s PlayStation console. (Microsoft reportedly made another offer earlier this year). Sony did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    The Nintendo deal is the latest attempt by Microsoft to ease concerns that its blockbuster acquisition of the gaming giant could harm competition in the industry.

    Microsoft announced plans to acquire Activision Blizzard in January in a deal valued at nearly $70 billion, which would be one of the biggest ever in the tech industry. The move could boost Microsoft’s standing in the gaming industry, as its Xbox console trails behind Sony’s PlayStation and the Nintendo Switch.

    Microsoft head of gaming Phil Spencer announced the commitment with Nintendo in a tweet and said it will continue to offer “Call of Duty” on gaming platform Steam if the deal is completed. “Microsoft is committed to helping bring more games to more people – however they choose to play,” he said.

    The company’s decision to bring “Call of Duty” to Nintendo comes as Microsoft’s Activision deal faces regulatory scrutiny on both sides of the Atlantic. The US Federal Trade Commission reportedly plans to sue Microsoft to block the Activision acquisition.

    But Smith this week defended the strategy, saying a block of the deal would be “a huge mistake.”

    “It would hurt competition, consumers and thousands of game developers,” he wrote in the Wall Street Journal.

    He argued that Microsoft faces “huge challenges” in the gaming industry, and the potential acquisition of Activision Blizzard could allow Microsoft to compete against these companies “through innovation that would benefit consumers.”

    Microsoft also wants to offer the option for customers to subscribe to a cloud gaming service that lets them stream a variety of games on multiple devices for a “reasonable” fee, Smith said. The company is open to providing the same commitment to other platforms, which would be legally enforceable by regulators in the United States, the United Kingdom and the European Union.

    According to Eric Abbruzzese, an analyst at ABI Research, the effort to open up access to its games shows Microsoft is “scrambling” to overcome regulatory hurdles.

    “If the offer helps the deal finalize, then that is a huge win that flies under the radar with ‘Call of Duty’ in the headlines,” he said. “But offering a single entity for a limited time would not be enough to circumvent regulation, as it is temporary and narrow in scope.”

    “Call of Duty” is arguably the most popular game title today, so the impact to consumers is notable. As of 2020, the game had topped 250 million downloads worldwide, according to data from SensorTower, an analytics firm that tracks app downloads.

    “Nintendo is not a high priority for ‘Call of Duty,’ all things considered – it has done perfectly fine without being on Nintendo recently,” Abbruzzese added. “Keeping it on Steam for the PC market is significant though, and obviously if this offer convinces Sony to accept as well, that’s gigantic.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Activision Still Trades at a Big Discount to Microsoft’s Deal. Investors Are Making a Mistake.

    Activision Still Trades at a Big Discount to Microsoft’s Deal. Investors Are Making a Mistake.

    [ad_1]

    Back in July, Barron’s made the case for buying


    Activision Blizzard


    stock in anticipation of


    Microsoft


    closing its $69 billion acquisition of the company. With


    Activision


    shares trading at a significant discount to the deal price, the stock looked closest to a sure thing in an increasingly uncertain market.

    Four months later, the risks of the deal falling apart over antitrust concerns haven’t changed. What has changed is the outlook for Activision’s business. The firm behind Call of Duty and Candy Crush is suddenly doing quite well on its own.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Activision CEO Bobby Kotick Donates $50,000 To Republican Who Protested 2020 Election

    Activision CEO Bobby Kotick Donates $50,000 To Republican Who Protested 2020 Election

    [ad_1]

    Rep. Mike Garcia

    Rep. Mike Garcia on the campaign trail
    Photo: Myung J. Chun (Getty Images)

    While it’s normal for prominent business people to donate to both sides of the political aisle, so that whoever wins an election they can call in some favours, as the Republican Party lurches further to the right some of the candidates being supported are deserving of a bit more scrutiny than usual.

    As Axios report, the race for a US House seat in California’s 27th District—part of the city of Los Angeles—is expected to go down to the wire on Tuesday, after the 2020 election saw Rep. Mike Garcia win by just 333 votes. His rival this week (as it was in 2020) is Democrat Christy Smith, and to help the incumbent over the line three wealthy donors have handed Garcia $50,000.

    One of those three donors is Activision CEO Bobby Kotick, who runs a company that has employed a Bush-era torture apologist and a Trump administration “bully”. “No other gaming executive has made a campaign contribution close to that size this cycle”, the Axios report clarifies, in case you wondering about the scale and context of that donation. While $50,000 is the legal limit for donations from an individual, Kotick has used workarounds to donate much larger sums to Republican candidates in the past. In March, a spokesperson for the Activision CEO said he “has given almost the same amount to Democrats and Republicans over the past five years”.

    Garcia’s campaign, and Kotick’s support of it, deserve extra scrutiny because like so much of the Republican party in 2022, he’s not just a conservative guy. Garcia, a MAGA devotee, was one of 139 representatives who, in January 2021, even after witnessing the violence at the Capitol on January 6, voted to object to the Presidential Electoral College results from two states, in effect protesting the democratic election of President Joe Biden, and giving what has been described as his “tacit support” to an insurrection.

    I know that nearly two years of watching the Republican Party slowly slide into a neo-fascist abyss has taken some of the sting out of this, but just take a second to note for the record that the CEO of Activision Blizzard has spent $50,000 supporting a man who opposed Trump’s impeachment for his role on January 6, has “pursued draconian curbs to women’s reproductive health and freedoms” and thinks the FBI’s investigation of former President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago property was “literally tyranny of a majority right now that is acting more like a Third Reich”.

    Kotick’s tenure as CEO has been marred by historic allegations of abuse and sexual harassment, which have led to major lawsuits and government investigations into conduct across several of the company’s studios.

    [ad_2]

    Luke Plunkett

    Source link

  • The Scariest Things That Happened In Gaming In 2022

    The Scariest Things That Happened In Gaming In 2022

    [ad_1]

    A fall guy, a crew mate(?), and Malenia stand near a "2022," spooky ghosts, and Gotham Knights for PS5.

    Image: Warner Bros. / Devolver Digital / Bandai Namco / Innersloth / Kotaku / Mia Stendal / Bibadash (Shutterstock)

    On an average day, my friends might ask me how my job is going. I’ll smile, tell them “It’s going great,” and then launch into a story about one of the most fucked up things they’ve ever heard of. And now I get to give the recap to you.

    Spooky season is upon us, but the chronically online gamers at Kotaku know that terrifying shit is happening in our space all the time. It’s not just the games that are occasionally horrifying—it’s also how the industry grinds humans into dust, how giant corporations are increasingly looking to put the screws to the average consumer, and how abuse of power comes as no surprise.

    Some of the spookiest gaming news stories this year are sad. Some of them are funny. Others will make you want to pull your hair out over the general state of the world. But hey, me too! Let’s be scared and [some other unidentifiable emotion] together!

    [ad_2]

    Sisi Jiang

    Source link

  • Blizzard Testers Win Case, Can Now Vote On Forming A Union [Update: Activision Responds]

    Blizzard Testers Win Case, Can Now Vote On Forming A Union [Update: Activision Responds]

    [ad_1]

    Image for article titled Blizzard Testers Win Case, Can Now Vote On Forming A Union [Update: Activision Responds]

    Image: Blizzard

    Back in July, a group of 21 quality assurance workers at Activision’s Albany studio—formerly known as Vicarious Visions—announced their intentions to unionise. Today, the National Labor Relations Board have confirmed that their vote can go ahead.

    The ruling came about because—and stop me if you’ve heard this one before—publishers Activision Blizzard initially opposed the move, saying that a larger group of 88 developers should be included in the vote, a textbook piece of union-busting that has also been tried at other Activision studios going through the process of unionisation.

    In this case it hasn’t worked; the NLRB’s ruling today clears the path for the workers to vote on forming a union, disagreeing (in a detailed breakdown explaining each of the studio’s departments, how their work differs and how underpaid testers are) with Activision’s claims that “we believe every employee in Albany who works on Diablo should have a direct say in this decision”.

    The ruling concludes:

    Based on the above, I conclude that the employees in the petitioned-for unit share a community of interest. I have also considered the similarities that exist among the developers and compared this to the testers. Developers are organized in separate departments, but departments that ultimately report to the head of the Diablo franchise. Developers have a diverse set of skills, training, and duties, but use these skills in a complementary manner in a production process that includes significant amount of contact and a high degree of functional integration. Compensation varies, but many terms and conditions of employment do have overlap among the developers.

    Comparing the developers’ community of interest to that of the testers I find that the distinct interests of the testers outweigh the similarities that exist with the developers. As noted, the testers participate in the same game development process that includes significant contact and functional integration. However, testers are separately organized in their own department and their supervisory hierarchy is entirely separate from the Diablo franchise. Testers also have a specific set of skills and duties different from the developers. Finally, testers are paid significantly less than developers. Moreover, the evidence of interchange between testers and developers is extremely limited. For these reasons I find any shared interests between the testers and developers do not outweigh the separate interests that make the petitioned-for unit an appropriate unit.

    The ruling instantly clears the path for an election, which will begin soon; ballots will be sent out on October 27, with votes being counted on November 18.

    A current employee at the studio, though not one of the testers involved in the vote, told the Washington Post “It’s about time. Our QA testers are some of the most talented and skilled people working in our company and they are critically undervalued by corporate. I think that all games workers need a union, but QA is in especially dire need.”

    Update 10:00pm ET: Lulu Cheng Meservey, Activision Blizzard’s Executive Vice President, Corporate Affairs and Chief Communications Officer, has responded to the finding on internal communications, writing:

    Hey all, quick heads up on something important. It’s a long one but wanna be thorough so thanks for bearing with me. This afternoon the NLRB (national labor relations board) determined that -20 QA (quality assurance) testers working on Diablo in Albany will be eligible to form a union and if the union wins the vote will be included in the bargaining unit.

    Where the company stands on that: fully respects the NLRB process, and fully supports the employees’ right to choose how they want to be represented. Also has the view that people who work closely together should be able to make decisions like that collectively – ie, we disagree that a handful of employees should get to decide for everyone else on the future of the entire Albany-based Diablo team. We think a direct dialogue between company and employees is the most productive route.

    Examples: through direct dialogue we’ve already converted contingent QA staff to full time, increased pay, increased benefits, opened up access to the bonus program, and offered more opportunities for professional advancement (which would also result in more pay).

    We feel collective bargaining is comparatively slow- once agreement is in place takes over a year on average according to a Bloomberg analysis. During the long contract negotiation companies from giving any pay/bonus/benefit increases without a special arrangement with the union, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics has reported that non-union employees generally get larger pay raises than union-represented groups. That’s consistent with what we saw with Raven, where there have only been three bargaining sessions since the union was certified there almost 6 months ago, due partly to the union cancelling pre-planned bargaining sessions for a month.

    I’m sharing all of that because having a streamlined process is a reason why the company prefers direct discussions – but ultimately it’s up to employees and everyone should get to vote their own preference in a fair election.

    What happens next with this is that ballots will be mailed to eligible Albany-based employees on Oct. 27, need to be returned by Nov. 17, and will get counted by the NLRB on Nov. 18.

    More to come as the process continues but wanted to share asap. Thanks so much for reading everyone.

    [ad_2]

    Luke Plunkett

    Source link