Microsoft and NVIDIA Announce Expansive New Gaming Deal

[NoneRain]

Yep.

MS just said goodbye to their Activision acquisition for sure.

Well played. Consolidate a bit more why don't you, in the battle for 'who controls the cloud'

And why is that? I mean, making the games available in services that are not owned by MS go in favor of the acquisition.

 

[trsttte]

And why is that? I mean, making the games available in services that are not owned by MS go in favor of the acquisition.

Microsoft also does game streaming and controls an important part of both the streaming and game licensing market. They're proposing a 10 year deal, big whoop, what happens after? Or even if they decide to revoke the deal in 5 years?

We're supposed to learn with experience, what happened with every buy out in the tech industry in the past decade again? If I was in the seat of regulators I'd be taking notes on the several examples Microsoft itself is providing on why this deal is a terrible idea.

 

[medi01]

GeForce NOW cloud gaming service, which has more than 25 million members in over 100 countries

Wow, if true.

 

[Vayra86]

And why is that? I mean, making the games available in services that are not owned by MS go in favor of the acquisition.

Monopolism is about the ability to manipulate the market through overwhelming influence. When Geforce NOW depends on an increasing share of its content owned by MS, it basically starts depending on MS. Nvidia doesnt make games - it invites parties to its service. What if MS is the only relevant party? Then MS gains leverage.

 

[Steevo]

Wow, if true.

People with more money than sense.

 

[ThrashZone]

Hi,
Carrot on a stick and then prices go up and up it's the subscription model so enjoy the games they offer monthly and don't be surprised when some drop off like netflix/.. do

 

[claes]

Yep.

MS just said goodbye to their Activision acquisition for sure.

Well played. Consolidate a bit more why don't you, in the battle for 'who controls the cloud'

Microsoft also does game streaming and controls an important part of both the streaming and game licensing market. They're proposing a 10 year deal, big whoop, what happens after? Or even if they decide to revoke the deal in 5 years?

We're supposed to learn with experience, what happened with every buy out in the tech industry in the past decade again? If I was in the seat of regulators I'd be taking notes on the several examples Microsoft itself is providing on why this deal is a terrible idea.

Monopolism is about the ability to manipulate the market through overwhelming influence. When Geforce NOW depends on an increasing share of its content owned by MS, it basically starts depending on MS. Nvidia doesnt make games - it invites parties to its service. What if MS is the only relevant party? Then MS gains leverage.

NGL none of these posts make sense to me. MS doesn't need nvidia, they own this market, and themselves work with other publishers. How doesn't this demonstrate that, if they were to acquire activision, that they would not continue to work with others?

 

[trsttte]

NGL none of these posts make sense to me. MS doesn't need nvidia, they own this market, and themselves work with other publishers. How doesn't this demonstrate that, if they were to acquire activision, that they would not continue to work with others?

And why are we supposed to hope they're good at their word and will keep working with others? Time and time again the same thing always happens, after enough time passes every company starts making use of their dominant position on the market to favour only themselves.

We shouldn't depend on a company being a good guy, they never are. The job of regulators is to prevent this situation from happening, which they suck at and usually completely fail - I hope this isn't another one of those times.

 

[claes]

Don’t know why you’re questioning my values when you seem to know full well that companies and regulators aren’t ethical. Doesn’t mean that MS doesn’t have a strategy to take advantage of these circumstances.

 

[Recus]

But Microsoft will never work with Nvidia again after Xbox. AMD already lost Nintento and Microsoft will go Apple M route or fully cloud.

If Nvidia, a PC-centric company, teams up with Mircosoft to release x-box games on GeForce NOW, but not on stand alone PC's without a GeForce NOW subscription, can we then call out Nvidia for being anti-PC gaming? And FWIW, I bought a 4070ti recently, so this is a bi-partisan attack on what seems to be a shitty move.

AMD is PC-centric company too plus in all consoles but not all consoles games comes to PC are they anti-PC gaming? Also number of shills supporting such anti Nvidia delusional from moderator is alarming.

 

[the54thvoid]

But Microsoft will never work with Nvidia again after Xbox. AMD already lost Nintento and Microsoft will go Apple M route or fully cloud.



AMD is PC-centric company too plus in all consoles but not all consoles games comes to PC are they anti-PC gaming? Also number of shills supporting such anti Nvidia delusional from moderator is alarming.

Yup. I'm so delusional I bought a 4070ti (after owning a 2080ti, after a 1080ti, and a 980ti, and two 780's).

 

[Garrus]

It shows effectively how many companies would be at Microsoft's mercy after the deal goes through.

It's easy to interpret this with whatever angle you want, but reality is Microsoft is not an underdog in anything. They're one of biggest companies on the planet, doesn't matter that they're not "top dog" in gaming (they're not top dog because there also isn't one, something they're desperately trying to change), they're still huge and shouldn't simply be allowed to buy their way to the top.

everyone buys their way to the top, including Sony, including Nintendo

(in fact it would shock you how many Nintendo games are by studios not created by Nintendo, Game Freak, Hal, and more)