Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)

Do you believe the deal will be approved?

  • Yes, will be approved without changes.

    Votes: 221 24.9%

  • Yes, will be approved but with structural changes to ABK.

    Votes: 102 11.5%

  • Yes, will be approved but only with behavioral concessions.

    Votes: 262 29.6%

  • No, will not be approved.

    Votes: 301 34.0%
  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
DarkMage619 said:
Well if they think it is about exclusive CoD they clearly haven't been listening to the numerous statements and signed commitments from MS to keep the game on PlayStation. It's already clear there are at least some biases with these European regulators so I'd question their objectivity at this point.
Click to expand...

Can we get a link to these signed agreements. It'd be beneficial to the thread.
 
Last edited:
DarkMage619 said:

Xbox Has Provided a Signed Agreement to Sony Promising to Bring Future Call of Duty Games to PlayStation

Xbox head Phil Spencer has revealed that Microsoft has given Sony a signed agreement promising…
gamingbolt.com gamingbolt.com

One simple Google search away. It was never a mystery what MS had planned for CoD.
Click to expand...

The way you worded led me to belive they'd signed a new contract/agreement which would be huge news. I didn't realize you were referring to the contract Microsoft offered which made Jimbo respond publicly and call the offer "totally inadequate."

In other news resetera is going after this poor woman for linking Ricardo's tweet.


Which means we might see new vids, blog posts, and articles about the EU bias from the usual suspects.
 
Pelta88 said:
The way you worded led me to belive they'd signed a new contract/agreement which would be huge news. I didn't realize you were referring to the contract Microsoft offered which made Jimbo respond publicly and call the offer "totally inadequate."

In other news resetera is going after this poor woman for linking Ricardo's tweet.

[/URL]

Which means we might see new vids, blog posts, and articles about the EU bias from the usual suspects.
Click to expand...

Jimbo, the arbiter of all that is fair and just in the gaming industry :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Pelta88 said:
Perhaps just the arbiter of the platform he's CEO of?
Click to expand...

Exactly. I'm sure that any deal that comes his way that is not in Sony's favour will be deemed 'totally inadequate'. But Sony's interests aren't the primary concern. If the regulators see availability on other platforms as the key concession and that deal (or some adjusted version of it) is seen to provide that, then what he as CEO of PlayStation deems inadequate has little relevance.

Regardless, it sounds like Phil Spencer is fairly pragmatic about all this and there will be negotiations between him and Jimbo in the future so it's all speculation until then.
 
Ain't happening.

Phil isn't leaving any room to backtrack without flat-out lying, which he's smart enough not to do.

"Native Call of Duty on PlayStation, not linked to them having to carry Game Pass, not streaming. If they want a streaming version of Call of Duty, we could do that as well, just like we do on our own consoles.
There's nothing behind my back. It is the Call of Duty Modern Warfare II doing great on PlayStation, doing great on Xbox. The next game, the next, next, next, next, next [game]. Native on the platform, not having to subscribe to Game Pass. Sony does not have to take Game Pass on their platform to make that happen.
There's nothing hidden. We want to continue to ship Call of Duty on PlayStation without any kind of weird 'aha I figured out the gotcha' as Phil said 'our intent.' I understand some people's concerns on this, and I'm just trying to be as clear as I can be."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ga...longer-term-commitment-to-call-of-duty-on?amp
 
Has been saying it all along

Edit - And the only ones who want it to be an Xbox exclusive are the so called 'Xbots" and don't want whats best for gaming they just want to deny something from Playstation
 
Last edited:
"I understand some people's concerns on this, and I'm just trying to be as clear as I can be."

pahD7qo.jpg
 
HeisenbergFX4 said:
Has been saying it all along

Edit - And the only ones who want it to be an Xbox exclusive are the so called 'Xbots" and don't want whats best for gaming they just want to deny something from Playstation
Click to expand...
He objectively didnt though, he was using the same rope-a-dope language he did around Bethesda until that deal finalized and then he was like, "yea these are exclusives." That is why people were so skeptical.
 
This reminds me of Eric Bischoff when he signed Bret Hart to WCW.

" I swear Vince that I won't say that the WWF Champion has signed and committed to WCW live on Nitro"

Yeah, dem the vibes I got. Maybe Philly isn't lying when he says it won't become an Xbox exclusive, but consider me in the surprised crowd if that were true.
 
They don't hit a billion in 2 days without PlayStation. It will stay on PlayStation.

This is obvious and anything else is stupid
 
HeisenbergFX4 said:
Has been saying it all along

Edit - And the only ones who want it to be an Xbox exclusive are the so called 'Xbots" and don't want whats best for gaming they just want to deny something from Playstation
Click to expand...
I mean, Jim Ryan did say that Phil only offered it for this gen (the cutoff date was an unironic Trojan horse of '27/'28). He then backpedaled and changed it to "as long as there is a PS" when the CMA made it one of the checkboxes of consumer concern. So he wasn't "always" saying it.
 
Last edited:
Captain Toad said:
Phil isn't leaving any room to backtrack without flat-out lying, which he's smart enough not to do.
Click to expand...
Suspicious Monkey GIF by MOODMAN


Captain Toad said:
"Native Call of Duty on PlayStation, not linked to them having to carry Game Pass, not streaming. If they want a streaming version of Call of Duty, we could do that as well, just like we do on our own consoles.
There's nothing behind my back. It is the Call of Duty Modern Warfare II doing great on PlayStation, doing great on Xbox. The next game, the next, next, next, next, next [game]. Native on the platform, not having to subscribe to Game Pass. Sony does not have to take Game Pass on their platform to make that happen.
There's nothing hidden. We want to continue to ship Call of Duty on PlayStation without any kind of weird 'aha I figured out the gotcha' as Phil said 'our intent.' I understand some people's concerns on this, and I'm just trying to be as clear as I can be."
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.gameinformer.com/2022/11/15/xbox-head-phil-spencer-has-no-issue-making-longer-term-commitment-to-call-of-duty-on?amp
Click to expand...
I still think this is just "Phil talk."

Just a few weeks ago, the CMA asked Microsoft to submit all this in writing and gave them a deadline. Microsoft did not submit it in writing. As a result, the CMA started phase 2 of the investigation.

If there is no "gotcha" moment, and if that's what Microsoft/Phil really wants (COD on PS for perpetuity), just submit it in writing. What's stopping them? If they do that, I'm sure the acquisition will just go through almost immediately.
 
I dont think anyone really cares if COD is Xbox/PC only or not.

And going by all the existing games already on competing consoles, they've yet to pull the plug on any of them when they could had ant any time to gimp ther game libraries while only allowing existing gamers who bought them to redownload them.

Hell, Skyrim is coming to PS+.
 
Heisenberg007 said:
Suspicious Monkey GIF by MOODMAN



I still think this is just "Phil talk."

Just a few weeks ago, the CMA asked Microsoft to submit all this in writing and gave them a deadline. Microsoft did not submit it in writing. As a result, the CMA started phase 2 of the investigation.

If there is no "gotcha" moment, and if that's what Microsoft/Phil really wants (COD on PS for perpetuity), just submit it in writing. What's stopping them? If they do that, I'm sure the acquisition will just go through almost immediately.
Click to expand...
That is not a gatcha.
Phase 2 was bound to happen regardless. Whether the cma demands it or not.

He'll, they did the same thing to EU, who are much bigger than CMA.
 
Last edited:
It will come to PlayStation. But will be on gamepass. Also Xbox will get first dibs on dlc and stuff.

sony are complaining about that too which is funny when they are currently paying themselves for first dibs.
 
 
Last edited:
diffusionx said:
He objectively didnt though, he was using the same rope-a-dope language he did around Bethesda until that deal finalized and then he was like, "yea these are exclusives." That is why people were so skeptical.
Click to expand...
DeepEnigma said:
I mean, Jim Ryan did say that Phil only offered it for this gen (the cutoff date was an unironic Trojan horse of '27/'28). He then backpedaled and changed it to "as long as there is a PS" when the CMA made it one of the checkboxes of consumer concern. So he wasn't "always" saying it.
Click to expand...
I just don't recall Phil saying it was a limited time offer, all I recall is Phil saying it would stay on PS

I remember Jimmie saying he was offered an additional 3 years after the current contract which to someone like me who has no idea how long these contracts run sounded like a decent offer

Phil may have very well said it will only stay on Playstation X amount of years then get pulled I haven't followed this nearly as closely as others have

I don't try to read between the lines either btw
 
Why would anyone actually want something like that any way? That's ridiculous. Besides, I felt like he was always incredibly upfront about this from the get-go. I don't think anything is going to change. COD makes way too much money being available on more than one platform.
 
HeisenbergFX4 said:
I just don't recall Phil saying it was a limited time offer, all I recall is Phil saying it would stay on PS

I remember Jimmie saying he was offered an additional 3 years after the current contract which to someone like me who has no idea how long these contracts run sounded like a decent offer

Phil may have very well said it will only stay on Playstation X amount of years then get pulled I haven't followed this nearly as closely as others have

I don't try to read between the lines either btw
Click to expand...
We know the contract length through the Apple vs Epic court discovery. So the cutoff date was estimated to be 2027/2028 which ironically makes it a next gen Trojan horse offer.

Thus, "an additional 3 years" is a big difference from "it will always be on PlayStation as long as there is a PlayStation" which he was not so open about. He was ambiguous prior to the CMA investigation, which prompted Jim Ryan to call him out on it.

The man speaks like a politician.
 
Last edited:


www.theverge.com

Phil Spencer really wants you to know that native Call of Duty will stay on PlayStation

Candy Crush sweetens the deal for Microsoft as it tries to acquire Activision.
www.theverge.com www.theverge.com
Keystone.
Keystone. It was more expensive than we wanted it to be when we actually built it out with the hardware that we had inside. We decided to focus that team's effort on delivering the smart TV streaming app. It was really just a direction, "Okay, we're going to focus our effort on our partnership with Samsung and where that app might continue to show up in different places over time." With Keystone, we're still focused on it and watching when we can get the right cost.
When you have Series S at $299 — and during the holidays you might see some price promotions — and you obviously have Series X higher, I think in order for a streaming-only box to make sense, the price delta to S has to be pretty significant. I want to be able to include a controller in it when we go do that. It was really just about whether we could build the right product at the right price, or if we couldn't, how could we focus the team's effort? We decided to go do the TV app with Samsung, and we're really happy with the results there.
What's the right price?
I don't want to announce pricing specifically, but I think you have to be somewhere around $129, $99 for that to make sense in my view. We just weren't there with a controller. I love the effort. The reason it's on my shelf is because the team rolled up their sleeves and in nine months they built that thing. A bunch of us took it home and it worked. It worked really, really well.
When you are building new products, it's always about, do you have the right design? Do you have the right user interface? Do you have the right customer proposition? That customer proposition includes the price, and I think all of us knew that we were a little out of position on price.
Was the price too high because of the processor or the controller inside? You keep mentioning Samsung TVs. They are not processing powerhouses. Everyone who's ever used a smart TV knows these things are underpowered out the gate and they feel even more underpowered over time.
This is why we will get there. It's different when you have your own power source. Not to go into the hardware design, but if this thing is standalone, it's not living on the power source and the integrated circuits that are already in the TV. You have to do everything bespoke. We made some decisions to make it easy. When it is turned on, it looks like an Xbox with the user interface and everything works. Some of the silicon choices we were making at the time of designing just didn't let us hit the price point that we wanted.
I love when teams go off; it was kind of like our back-compat team back in the day. I applaud when teams go off and take a crazy mission of, "We're going to build a streaming console and all try it at home, and the experience will be really good." I love when teams take risks and deliver. I think it's fantastic.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
DeepEnigma said:
We know the contract length through the Apple vs Epic court discovery. So the cutoff date was estimated to be 2027/2028 which ironically makes it a next gen Trojan horse offer.

Thus, "an additional 3 years" is a big difference from "it will always be on PlayStation as long as there is a PlayStation" which he was not so open about. He was ambiguous prior to the CMA investigation, which prompted Jim Ryan to call him out on it.

The man speaks like a politician.
Click to expand...
Without a doubt he is a used car salesman

I am just saying I have not seen Phil say anything other than it would stay on Playstation
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MS/ABK is advertising games that don't exist for data collection
46
2K
POKEYCLYDE replied
My apologies to Ubisoft, Sony, Activision, EA, MS etc. for making a big deal out of $70 games
2 3 4
156
6K
MDSLKTR replied
Microsoft, Activision Deny Report Regarding Financial Performance
Business Hardware  2 3
131
11K
Jaybe replied
What happened to all the people that were cheering over that MS Activision acquisition?
Drama  5 6 7 8 9
414
18K
GateofD replied
Microsoft has Closed the Activision Blizzard King Deal
22 23 24 25 26
1K
99K
MasterCornholio replied
Top Bottom