BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
I totally agree but brand recognition is a bitch. A large chunk of people would just buy Xbox next gen to play Fifa/COD/Fortnite.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
I totally agree but brand recognition is a bitch. A large chunk of people would just buy Xbox next gen to play Fifa/COD/Fortnite.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Last edited:
Splatoon 3 is the highest selling game in Japan. EVER.
Sony could do the same with the shooter IPs they owned if they actually invested in them.
Hero of Spielberg
Member
Would it be large enough chunk for MS to overtake Sony as market leader do you think?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
MS should invest in all their IPs as well, instead of buying 3rd party publishers to play keep off the competition.
Last edited:
Hero of Spielberg
Member
What do you do if you crash your car? You buy a new one!
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Only if it’s totaled. You saying HI is totaled?What do you do if you crash your car? You buy a new one!
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
Nintendo just rules Japan with an iron fist at this point. They know their audience over there and deliver the goods for them.
Sony definitely has more than one FPS in the works. Will any of them get traction? Who knows. Ubisoft has been trying to get into the space for a while and their stuff keeps flopping even as f2p games.
Hero of Spielberg
Member
Nah, but they probably don't like driving it as much anymore.
laynelane
Member
I think they already are and have been for a while now. It's been jarring to see the whole blame Sony movement in action - every time I think it can't get worse, it does. Now we have MS doing it in legal documents to the CMA and "journalists" talking about revenge for a possible acquisition failure and absolutely no interest or understanding of the multiple issues at play. Still, you're right in that there will be an increase if the deal falls apart. Cringe for days.
Huh? Siege remains one of the most popular shooters.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
Who can say? Xbox 360 was hugely popular. Maybe COD popularity slows down over the next few years and something else comes along.
I don’t even know if you could say Sony is market leader. Nintendo sells more hardware and profits more.
3liteDragon
Member
Last edited:
Topher
Identifies as young
I don’t get why people are taking these arguments from corporate lawyers seriously. MS is going to say whatever they can to get the deal done. Sony is going to say whatever they can to block it. That’s all this is.
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
In Japan they play mainly handheld. In the west we don't.
Can't really compare it like that.
Last edited:
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
Hyperscape - dead
Their l4d style shooter - may as well be dead
They also announced that really shitty looking division spinoff. The market is fickle, who knows what will take off anymore.
Balducci30
Member
I still don’t get why you would pay 70 billion for activision and their IP’s
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
Mobile is the most popular platform worldwide lol.
Hero of Spielberg
Member
Difficult to say I agree. I think with most of the concerns about the acquisition there's a lot of water to go under the bridge for them to actually pan out. Interesting to see what the final decision is as I imagine MS would be pushing that angle.
Responding against a company that stopped your biggest acquisition in history is exactly how business works.
Anyone who tries to compete directly against Fortnite without doing something new deserves to have a dead game.
If you’re talking about Extraction, that’s really just a Siege PvE expansion they decided to sell as a standalone.
Hero of Spielberg
Member
I mean they're pretty much buying an instant boost to their Gamepass service and guaranteed subscriptions without having to develop the games themselves. They're in the subscription business and need content.
CuNi
Member
I have no clue about a process of this size and all the surrounding legalities, but I have a question.
I keep seeing more and more people say that there are blatant errors and holes in CMAs arguing in the case against MS.
If there are provable errors in the findings that lead to them denying the acquisition, is there actually any legal ground for MS to fight the decision?
Or if Sony can provide documents that show Microsoft is willingly obscuring data, gimping numbers etc. that lead to CMA OK-ing the deal, has Sony any ground to fight that?
I wondered because I assumed the CMA is a state authority, but there also have to be ways to challenge the decision, for either MS or Sony.
I keep seeing more and more people say that there are blatant errors and holes in CMAs arguing in the case against MS.
If there are provable errors in the findings that lead to them denying the acquisition, is there actually any legal ground for MS to fight the decision?
Or if Sony can provide documents that show Microsoft is willingly obscuring data, gimping numbers etc. that lead to CMA OK-ing the deal, has Sony any ground to fight that?
I wondered because I assumed the CMA is a state authority, but there also have to be ways to challenge the decision, for either MS or Sony.
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Changed it to handheld(consoles) , not just fast enough
remember_spinal
Banned
Let’s all sing it together: “aaaaall first party platforms in the house tonight, should go out and build their own FPS instead of buy! And you don’t ahve to speeeeend a dime, everybody has the ip and tiiiiime”
SSfox
Member
Same on why Cell had to absorb C18 to become more powerful, that was the only way for him to become stronger than all sayans and the strongest in the universe. He could have trained to be as powerful as the best sayans but it would take him hundreds or thousands of years, and even then you need to consider than sayans would still become also stronger with the time as they naturally keep training, so in that case that's like a "never" case for Cell to ever be a strong as sayans. So absorbing C18 as his only option to stand a chance VS Goku and cie. Just like MS only option to compete VS Sony and even Nintendo is by absorbing the biggest publishers like Acti and Beth in the industry.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I know you’re being facetious, but you know why.
Pelta88
Member
This is actually kinda frightening. 4 hours to create a pro XBOX graphic to showcase Activision, a publisher XBOX doesn't actually own yet?
4 whole hours means Colt's raised the bar on sycophancy.
Last edited:
ZehDon
Gold Member
Not at all. You develop a new strategy that achieves your goals and get on with it. In Microsoft's case, it's getting as many Game Pass subscribers as possible. With no Call of Duty to drive that, the goal doesn't change - they'll just develop a new strategy to achieve it.
ChorizoPicozo
Member
This is fucking cringe.This is actually kinda frightening. 4 hours to create a pro XBOX graphic to showcase Activision, a publisher XBOX doesn't actually own yet?
4 whole hours means Colt's raised the bar on sycophancy.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
This is actually kinda frightening. 4 hours to create a pro XBOX graphic to showcase Activision, a publisher XBOX doesn't actually own yet?
4 whole hours means Colt's raised the bar on sycophancy.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Whelp, looks like even if the deal closes, MS won't be able to put new CoD games on game pass day 1 as part of honoring the Sony x Activision agreements which include keeping the games off of game pass.
Last edited:
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
And there were people in here that actually believed they could not imagine Sony been paying developers not to have their games come to the platform.
Resident Evil, and Call of Duty are now known to be struck by that, and I wouldn't be surprised if they'd block several other games.
I know it's an old tweet, but it still shows Sony are paying heavy money to prevent game pass to get some of the bigger games.
Should invest in their own similar service instead of ruining it for the players, even though they are green rats.
Last edited:
ZehDon
Gold Member
In my opinion, the existence of that clause in Sony's agreement with Activision Blizzard demonstrates their anti-competitive nature in the game subscription service arena, undermining one of their chief complaints and the CMA's stance that Microsoft's position would enable it to dominate that arena. Sony is actively ensuring its competitors can't enhance the value of their own services with non-Sony parties, so that it doesn't have to try and compete.
Whelp, looks like even if the deal closes, MS won't be able to put new CoD games on game pass day 1 as part of honoring the Sony x Activision agreements which include keeping the games off of game pass.
Topher
Identifies as young
Uh…yeah, more than likely any game Sony has a marketing deal with. This is not new. People said they couldn’t imagine what’s been known for months?
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
And I’m so sure Microsoft would allow Sony to put stuff on PS+ in a launch window for free, to gamers for games they have marketing deals with too.Uh…yeah, more than likely any game Sony has a marketing deal with. This is not new. People said they couldn’t imagine what’s been known for months?
Some of y’all are lost in the plot with normal business practices.
Last edited:
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
The big question is, if Microsoft are good enough to call Sony out for it to the CMA, or if the CMA is biased.
It's clear as day that Microsoft doesn't keep cod multiplatform because they want to, but because of previous contracts, but the more Sony talks about being anti competitive, the skeleton just keeps popping out of the closet showing they are world wide champion in doing what they have a current crusade against.
It will be interesting to see if CMA cares about it, or simply ignores it.
DForce
NaughtyDog Defense Force
It's called a marketing deal.
Marketing deals are used to attract gamers to your platform by offering them a better deal. No one in their right mind would sign a marketing deal and then allow someone else to put the game on their subscription service.
If Microsoft had a marketing deal for Cyberpunk 2077, then that means they also had restrictions, too.
Last edited:
Topher
Identifies as young
Has Cyberpunk 2077 ever been on Game Pass?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Welp, we’re at that point again,
DForce
NaughtyDog Defense Force
It hasn't.
remember_spinal
Banned
Better call Jimbo
The only way to have a sustainable subscription service like Gamepass is to invest heavily in 1st party content. Microsoft understands that which is the entire reason they want Activision. They can careless about exclusivity and likely don't care about Xbox console sales, they just want content for their subscription service. Sony will have taken a shot gun to those plans if they are successful at stopping the merger.
I don't agree at all that Microsoft would just move on and change directions. The cool thing is one of us will be proven right in time.
Topher
Identifies as young
How the hell did Sony get their “no game pass” clause in Microsoft’s marketing agreement? That’s the only possible answer, right?
Ghost of Caelid
Banned
I feel like if the deal falls through they need to do their best to regulate gaming in general then. Exclusivity deals such as FF7 re, or scorn, exclusive third party content like missions in legacy, blocking games from services etc need to have strict deadlines or preventative measures since that seems to be the main concern of the deal. Make it an industry wide standard
remember_spinal
Banned
That will only hurt 3rd party developers that rely on marketing and exclusivity deals to help fund their games or recover development cost.
A lot of developers, even big ones just don’t have the means to mass market their products without sony, microsoft, and nintendo footing the bill
Last edited:
bender
What time is it?
As much as I dislike 3rd party exclusive deals, at least all the players have the rights to bid on said exclusivity and that's more favorable than the 3rd party getting gobbled up all together.
remember_spinal
Banned
yeah, its fairly democratic. Nintendo gets their 3rd part exclusives, sony gets theres, and microsoft gets theres…its ultimately up to the dev/pub whether its beneficial for their game or not.
Nintendo for example is probably doing a lot to keep Squares AA games alive, as Sony is spending a lot to mitigate their AAA development cost.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
No.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked