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.
Agent Icebeezy said:
A new internal report from MLex says this:

Microsoft's Call of Duty deal with Nintendo is misleading, Sony argues

Sony has criticized Microsoft's deal to make the game Call of Duty available on Nintendo — should its $69 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard be approved by regulators — as smoke and mirrors, MLex has learned.

Activision Blizzard could supply Call of Duty to Nintendo today, but doesn't, because Nintendo's younger audience is not interested in the first-person shooter and a previous version of the game on its console was a commercial flop, the arch critic of the deal says, MLex understands.

Instead of being a logical business decision, the licensing agreement is a tactic designed to make Microsoft — whose acquisition has drawn concerns in the EU, UK and US — look cooperative with regulators, the argument goes.

Furthermore, Nintendo's Switch could not run Call of Duty easily and may never be able to, Sony argues, MLex understands. Developing a version of the game compatible with the Switch could take years, making a 10-year licensing deal meaningless.

It is easier for Nintendo to enter into such an agreement, Sony says, MLex has learned. Nintendo doesn't need to worry about equal treatment for its subscription service or cloud gaming service as those are not areas where it currently competes aggressively, the argument goes.
Click to expand...
Wow, the blatant lying by Sony. Disgusting.
 
DarkMage619 said:
I'm not the one arguing that the Switch wasn't in competition with PlayStation and Xbox like it doesn't cost both time and money. I didn't argue that Xbox was third in the console market at the same time arguing it wasn't in competition with Switch at all. All three consoles have features and modes that are unique to each platform and it is clear that the only reason people are trying to set the Switch apart is to support Sony's argument that CoD is critical to success of a gaming system which was always a ridiculous assertion. THAT is nonsense.
Click to expand...

All this time and you're still incapable of actually processing what's been argued
 
DarkMage619 said:
I'm not the one arguing that the Switch wasn't in competition with PlayStation and Xbox like it doesn't cost both time and money. I didn't argue that Xbox was third in the console market at the same time arguing it wasn't in competition with Switch at all. All three consoles have features and modes that are unique to each platform and it clear that the only reason people are trying to set the Switch apart is to support Sony's argument that CoD is critical to success of a gaming system what that was always a ridiculous assertion. THAT is nonsense.
Click to expand...

Jim Carrey What GIF
 
So did the deal go through or something.

Also how the fuck does this thread have ~12k responses. Guessing 95% of the responses are stupid arguments?
 
Ass of Can Whooping said:
It's almost like none of us actually said this
Click to expand...
I'm simplifying a broad general sentiment for just shorthand discussion here. I'm not quoting anyone. You can plug in whatever extremely specific version of it you want. Sony is obviously arguing the deal should not go through. Put that in place of that line. The point is that they are arguing both sides of the Nintendo issue and it's dumb.
 
kiphalfton said:
So did the deal go through or something.

Also how the fuck does this thread have ~12k responses. Guessing 95% of the responses are stupid arguments?
Click to expand...
The deal is far away from being done.
What you see here is the 98% of this thread.
From page 223 until this page, only a single post managed to make this shit.
 
Last edited:
kiphalfton said:
So did the deal go through or something.

Also how the fuck does this thread have ~12k responses. Guessing 95% of the responses are stupid arguments?
Click to expand...
Yes it's useless and disingenous arguing between the same people at 98% :messenger_tears_of_joy:
The only news is that regulators from UK, Europe and US are intentioned to oppose the deal and things could escalate to the lawsuit phase. Microsoft is trying to fight back with PR promises like a 10 years deal for COD to both Sony and Nintendo but so far no result has been reached.
 
Banjo64 said:
Can you explain further?
Click to expand...
The unionization isnt going to be helpful, due to outsource jobs.
Its only effective on the country, which has it. Doesnt take affect outside of those countries.

MS can essentially hire people from those countries, as they do with their visa work. Which would mean less work for those in the country, as their job is being done by cheap labor.

Rich companies dont get rich by following the rules.
 
feynoob said:
The unionization isnt going to be helpful, due to outsource jobs.
Its only effective on the country, which has it. Doesnt take affect outside of those countries.

MS can essentially hire people from those countries, as they do with their visa work. Which would mean less work for those in the country, as their job is being done by cheap labor.

Rich companies dont get rich by following the rules.
Click to expand...
Yes, I understand that Microsoft could just choose to employee foreign staff who aren't a part of a union, but why would they do that when they don't do it to Rare/Ninja Theory/Playground?
 
feynoob said:
Rich companies dont get rich by following the rules.
Click to expand...
The above is exactly why you should caution against assuming people against this deal are fanboys of a console. For people like myself who just want to play modern COD without having to buy new hardware, your above words are why the 10 year PR is meaningless to me.
 
Punished Miku said:
I'm simplifying a broad general sentiment for just shorthand discussion here. I'm not quoting anyone. You can plug in whatever extremely specific version of it you want. Sony is obviously arguing the deal should not go through. Put that in place of that line. The point is that they are arguing both sides of the Nintendo issue and it's dumb.
Click to expand...

Plenty of dumb arguments by Sony, but the arguments here are being entirely rephrased to the point they have no resemblance of what was originally said.
 
Activision Blizzard could supply Call of Duty to Nintendo today, but doesn't, because Nintendo's younger audience is not interested in the first-person shooter
Click to expand...
That's funny considering all of the 9 years olds yelling at everyone in the game.
 
NickFire said:
The above is exactly why you should caution against assuming people against this deal are fanboys of a console. For people like myself who just want to play modern COD without having to buy new hardware, your above words are why the 10 year PR is meaningless to me.
Click to expand...
Excuse Me What GIF by ION


You are talking to a guy, who is keeping tap of this deal, and their documents.

Everything that is coming from both sides is just to appease the regulators. Aka, lawyers talk to regulators.

Only results that matters to us, is the regulators results. As that is the definitive answer to this deal.
 
Topher said:
Plenty of dumb arguments by Sony, but the arguments here are being entirely rephrased to the point they have no resemblance of what was originally said.
Click to expand...
Every day, the clown circle needs a new ways to entertain people.

Expect the next leaks to be even more absurd than what we currently have now. Its getting crazier, as the hole gets deeper.
 
Ass of Can Whooping said:
All this time and you're still incapable of actually processing what's been argued
Click to expand...
Oh I process it just fine. It's OK to use Nintendo to point out how Xbox is in third place. It is not OK to show how Nintendo is doing just fine without CoD which puts the entire idea of CoD being a 'input' for a successful gaming platform into doubt. It's double standard that I totally get but let's not pretend people are being sincere.

Topher said:
Jim Carrey What GIF
Click to expand...
Don't worry about it. Some of us have been closely following arguments made by both Sony and the CMA. If you haven't don't concern yourself.

Ass of Can Whooping said:
Fair enough. That's not what Mage is doing with his bad faith takes as usual though, so that's why I've responded to you.
Click to expand...
Hilarious coming from you bro. It's a totally fair take to argue Nintendo isn't competing though. Very funny.

Punished Miku said:
Sometimes I can't flawlessly explain what I mean. I even tried bullet points lol. I'm a failure. :messenger_pensive:
Click to expand...
You explained it fine people are now trying to argue something different even though they vociferously argued Nintendo isn't doing the same things Sony and MS are doing.

Switch on store shelves right next to Xbox and PlayStation? Check.

Switch systems counted on NPD like Xbox and PlayStation? Check.

Switch playing 3rd party adult titles like Xbox and PlayStation? Check.

Conclusion? Nintendo doesn't count. Hilarious.

Regardless the MS announcement about CoD should be celebrated. Since CoD is a requirement for console success MS will save Nintendo by making it available to their system again right? No reason for anyone to have a problem with that.
 
Last edited:
Banjo64 said:
Can you explain further?
Click to expand...
I am not taking about MS buying studios being dependant of unionization or not.

If you have been following (even before this circus) there has been conversations about crunch, inside culture, harassment, wages, royalties etc inside the gaming industry.

As far as I known, there are not videogame unions.

And is pretty well documented how Activision (and another big tech companies) use"union busting" tactics.


The points is:

Several days ago the CWA basically endorsed Acti-Blizz acquisition alongside this :
fhS41yp.jpg

And before it:
uSFJZ25.jpg

Lina Khan made this interview:


In which you can see her intentions to modernize the anti-trust approach. Including the protection of the Work-Force.

So, if you see my comment again:
Is not about :

whining voice: "CoD on Switch, we cannot survive without CoD, Sony is a baby, MS are liars, and blah, blah blah blah blah".

the implementation of video games unions has MASSIVE implications.




 
Basil King said:
What?!? When did COD ever release on switch? It dropped on every other Nintendo system but not switch.

COD Ghosts flopped on the Wii-U, but COD Ghosts flopped harder than Vanguard. Also Wii-U was a flop. Sony doesn't point that shit out though.

Mojang wasn't on Nintendo and wasn't planning on being on Nintendo until Microsoft purchased them. Now look at it.

Microsoft will put it out on Switch and Sony is scared. End story.
Click to expand...
Please explain to us why the most money hungry CEO in the history of video games, Bobby Kotick, is ignoring the Switch 100+ millions install base? Because of Sony?

I'm sure he never thought about putting COD on Switch until MS said it 🙄
DarkMage619 said:

I posted this earlier but Hoeg gave a fantastic breakdown on the 'kid focus' the Switch has. It starts at about 27 minute mark. It is amazing the knots Sony and some supporters will twist themselves into to show Nintendo is no longer a gaming competitor. I question if these arguments are made in good faith.

www.steamygamer.com

Hentai Sex Games On Nintendo Switch | Steamy Gamer

Are there sex games on Nintendo Switch? Yes. And until recently, they were only available for players in Japan. The good news, hentai games are now accessible to players worldwide!
www.steamygamer.com www.steamygamer.com

Yup totally a 'kiddie' platform with no mature games at all.
Click to expand...

How did Bobby Kotick ignore all these hentai sex games fans on Switch? I'm sure they would buy COD Day 1.

Ask Hoeg Law
 
Topher said:
Who cares? None of us are experts in buying corporations.
Click to expand...

I couldn't care less if people are experts, discussion is open for all. I was merely asking as the person I was responding to was attempting to shut down others on the basis of 'having no idea'. When in fact they themselves have even less idea.
 
DarkMage619 said:
Oh I process it just fine. It's OK to use Nintendo to point out how Xbox is in third place. It is not OK to show how Nintendo is doing just fine without CoD which puts the entire idea of CoD being a 'input' for a successful gaming platform into doubt. It's double standard that I totally get but let's not pretend people are being sincere.


Don't worry about it. Some of us have been closely following arguments made by both Sony and the CMA. If you haven't don't concern yourself.


Hilarious coming from you bro. It's a totally fair take to argue Nintendo isn't competing though. Very funny.


You explained it fine people are now trying to argue something different even though they vociferously argued Nintendo isn't doing the same things Sony and MS are doing.

Switch on store shelves right next to Xbox and PlayStation? Check.

Switch systems counted on NPD like Xbox and PlayStation? Check.

Switch playing 3rd party adult titles like Xbox and PlayStation? Check.

Conclusion? Nintendo doesn't count. Hilarious.

Regardless the MS announcement about CoD should be celebrated. Since CoD is a requirement for console success MS will save Nintendo by making it available to their system again right? No reason for anyone to have a problem with that.
Click to expand...

And he continues to argue in bad faith. Shocker
 
ChorizoPicozo said:
I am not taking about MS buying studios being dependant of unionization or not.

If you have been following (even before this circus) there has been conversations about crunch, inside culture, harassment, wages, royalties etc inside the gaming industry.

As far as I known, there are not videogame unions.

And is pretty well documented how Activision (and another big tech companies) use"union busting" tactics.


The points is:

Several days ago the CWA basically endorsed Acti-Blizz acquisition alongside this :
fhS41yp.jpg

And before it:
uSFJZ25.jpg

Lina Khan made this interview:


In which you can see her intentions to modernize the anti-trust approach. Including the protection of the Work-Force.

So, if you see my comment again:
Is not about :

whining voice: "CoD on Switch, we cannot survive without CoD, Sony is a baby, MS are liars, and blah, blah blah blah blah".

the implementation of video games unions has MASSIVE implications.
Click to expand...

MS is using this news for their benefit. They had a meetng with lina khan today.

Activision situation and Zenimax unionization makes a good slum dunk points for MS, during this meeting.

Outside of that, it would make some serious serious ripple effect in the gaming industry. Especially with MS agreeing to these demands.
 
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