demigod
Member
You think that if ms didn’t buy Bethesda, Bethesda wouldn’t release their future iterations of games they already released and sold the most on. It’s no wonder why phil loves fans like you.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Improbable? Surely they didn't use that word. That would make your argument weaker than it already is. But no. I believe they were referring to the current incentives at that time.
If it'll make you feel better, I can just agree with you. Whether they lied, misconstrued, spoke vaguely, etc... or not doesn't matter to me. Whatever it is, it was 100% worth it for all the whining, bitching, and pitiful port begging that's happened as a result.
You think big bad scary MS mislead regulators? Sure, fine, whatever. Cry more.
Yes, when someone tells me something is implausible, the logical thing to assume is that it's going to happen.
Cheeses be dumb
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Bruh, you've had no issue discussing this in the context of EU regulation beforehand. What they said after they got through the hurdle is irrelevant. Come the fuck on now
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
What scrutiny did it face? Not a single regulator tried to block it or added remedies to it. Did it even go into in depth probes anywhere?
Gobjuduck
Banned
Sorry, not regulator scrutiny. The regulatory scrutiny is for the 70 billion dollar one. But Sony’s arguments against xbox recently would apply to themselves in future purchases.
Why is that irrelevant? That better explains Xbox’s goal for the acquisition. No one knew what they meant until after.
What was said before was enough to get it passed, and the EU didn’t comment on Xbox lying or not honoring set conditions or statements of the deal. Xbox has been faithful to what was set before the closure (which was vague as fuck).
Last edited:
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
The bad faith is strong in this one
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
Regulatory scrutiny is all that matters though... what other scrutiny are you referring to?
Bumblebeetuna
Member
I mentioned it not to compare the two deals themselves but just to compare the reactions to the two and how they are viewed. It just shows the hypocrisy and warrior mentality that is dominating this thread. Of course the guy I responded to, who was talking down to someone for claiming there was no definite PS5 Starfield, is delusional enough to believe SFV was never happening without Sony.
Yes, it’s silly to think that without the acquisition, Starfield wasn’t coming to PS5. It was coming, and most likely timed exclusive to PS5. It’s just as silly to think Capcom would have never made a sequel to fucking Street Fighter. Yet many of the people who laugh at the first claim, believe fully in the second claim.
“but Capcom was in financial trouble!!” - and Bethesda wasnt? Bethesda agreed to be acquired just for the hell of it?
“but Sony helped fund the game!” - and MS hasn’t funded Starfield?
So why do people suddenly get so naive when it comes to SFV? Because it’s Sony.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Sony buying T2 will surely raise concerns and trigger a similar type of investigation that we're witnessing right now. Having said that, I've been thinking about the future based on the potential outcome of this ABK acquisition. I think Sony is gonna win in either case:
1) Let's assume MS / ABK acquisition is blocked -- that's a stright-forward and direct win by Sony, 100%. With ABK blocked, Sony also blocks the path to many more acquisitions by gaming companies, which means everybody is fighting on Sony's grounds. And Sony is the undisputed champion there.
2) Let's assume MS / ABK acquisition gets approved -- that sets a precedence of approving the world's biggest publisher with one of the biggest IPs. Now suppose (hypothetical scenario) if Sony acquires SE, Capcom, CDPR, WB Gaming, and Kadokawa. Even those 5 publishers combined do not equal ABK. How will regulators block those acquisitions when they just approved a $70 billion ABK/MS acquisition, despite Sony's concerns.
Without this ABK acquisition, and Sony's concerns, I think Sony would have found it difficult to make these acquisitions. That won't be the case if ABK is approved.
Before anyone jumps on this, I want to make it clear that this is just a hypothetical scenario. Moreover, I also believe that Sony does not want to acquire big publishers. Their acquisitions will be more targeted and strategic than buying a publisher and all the deadweight that comes with it.
Gobjuduck
Banned
7.5 billion + 70 billion to buy publishers is bad because xbox is taking away games from PlayStation.
While at the same time, final fantasy 16 won’t be Xbox! Spider-Man 2, not on Xbox! Silent hill 2, won’t be on Xbox yes! hogwarts gets exclusive dlc on ps5!
Don’t get why Xbox being in third place and investing in publishers that are open to sale is bad. Especially since it’s Sony fans who are the only ones who care, who’ve rejoiced exclusives and platform advantages that were BOUGHT!
All you can say is Xbox lied in some vague statement about incentives so therefore they are evil and will pull the rug. Which is why the Activision deal is dead.
While at the same time, final fantasy 16 won’t be Xbox! Spider-Man 2, not on Xbox! Silent hill 2, won’t be on Xbox yes! hogwarts gets exclusive dlc on ps5!
Don’t get why Xbox being in third place and investing in publishers that are open to sale is bad. Especially since it’s Sony fans who are the only ones who care, who’ve rejoiced exclusives and platform advantages that were BOUGHT!
All you can say is Xbox lied in some vague statement about incentives so therefore they are evil and will pull the rug. Which is why the Activision deal is dead.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
I think you need to stop interpreting and start reading
PropellerEar
Member
Fresh post with old shill script...whose alt are you?
Xbox ‘turned Marvel down’, leading to Spider-Man on PS4, exec reveals | VGC
An interview with a Marvel exec reveals that Microsoft passed on the chance for exclusivity…
www.videogameschronicle.com
Gobjuduck
Banned
Sleeping sounds better.
The Spider-Man bit is just an example withholding big IPs from Sony’s rival. They fairly bought and funded the game, just like Xbox bought and funded starfield. Both are fair.
Alto saxophone
demigod
Member
I thought about replying to you about how it’s always one sided that only Sony can make 3rd party deals. I looked up what exclusives xbox had last year and there were none that was worth a damn to mention.
Nothing1234
Banned
Adjacent case but interesting.
Last edited:
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
Exclusivity deals aren't new, nor are they exclusive to Sony.
Microsoft had a chance to make a Marvel game and passed
Silent Hill is only popular BECAUSE of PlayStation in the first place and the game is probably only being made because of funding by Sony
PlayStation also helped take Final Fantasy to another level of popularity with advertising of FF7 that reached all new levels
I think FF6 sold 3 million compared to FF7 that sold 14 million now...
But I digress.
Big difference between the precedence of exclusivity deals and taking non-gaming revenue to outright buy the largest publisher in the business.
That you aren't getting that is astonishing to me, and I'm someone who hopes this deal actually goes through.
PropellerEar
Member
Nothing1234
Banned
I can’t believe I am reading Spider Man in this thread.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
My guess is the CMA comes back and either says no or here are the remedies.
Divest from COD entirely finding a 3rd party independent publisher to buy the rights to it such as T2, EA, or Tencent.
Either will kill this deal.
Gobjuduck
Banned
Xbox helped Bethesda with the success of morrowind, oblivion, fallout 3, new Vegas, maybe Skyrim. Bethesda games found great success on windows PCs.
So it makes sense that microsoft acquired Bethesda permanently.
Activision blizzard is also a great match. Since most of blizzards users are on windows PCs, and call of duty was very successful because of Xbox live.
Naa, I get it. it’s just odd to me that Sony‘s fears for the ABK acquisition are totally hypocritical. It’s just Sony trying to get a better deal. Sony foot soldiers come out looking hypocritical too.
I think the deal will go through. But who knows.
Last edited:
ROFL at the balls on their lawyers.
Wondering what category of app was under
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/roblox/id431946152
Last edited:
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
I don't know whether sony wants to acquire publishers or not. I think at some rate they'll have to, but Sony doesn't have a ton of money for this stuff. They aren't just a gaming company and until recently their M&A focus has been on building their music and movie divisions.
I think a purchase of T2 would have some scrutiny, but it isn't nearly as large a purchase as this is. Activision is literally worth more than triple that of T2, and it's almost 4x.
I think Sony's position in the industry changes things too, they're already the market leader, but they also haven't had a history of antitrust, nor do they have something like azure that positions them for cloud gaming in the future or windows. It's pretty difficult to accuse them of antitrust just for going after T2. Anything smaller would 100% go through as well.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
I fully agree with you that it made sense for Microsoft to buy Bethesda, never said otherwise.
Call of Duty WAS very successful but now the vast majority of players play on PS. That's what makes this an anti-trust situation.
If Microsoft wanted to buy CDPR, I think that would make sense too. Same with Ubi Soft as Splinter Cell was huge on Xbox, while Metal Gear was big on PlayStation.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Interesting indeed. Thanks for sharing!
Gobjuduck
Banned
Why isn’t the 10 year deal along with ps plus deals enough? That’s pretty generous of Xbox and Activision.
What could Xbox offer Sony? I don’t see why Sony should be entitled to CoD forever. Two decade long assurance?
At face value, Sonys resistance is unreasonable.
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Imagine if, after this, Sony buys Take 2 and, in their announcement post, mentions:
"We have no intentions of taking Take 2 games off of rival platforms
Jokes apart, if this keeps going, yes, they will eventually have to buy some publisher as a defense strategy. I think they'll go for Capcom or CDPR.
It's also worth noting that Sony still hasn't responded in kind to either Zenimax or ABK. They have yet to acquire anyone in retaliation yet. Bungie's acquisition talks began even before (May 2020) Microsoft announced Zenimax's acquisition (September 2020).
I think that may also be one of the reasons why Sony wasn't focused on the exclusivity clause with Bungie, because at that point, Microsoft hadn't even acquired Zenimax, and Sony's focus wasn't on exclusivity. Their primary focus was on GaaS skills and learnings from Bungie.
Gobjuduck
Banned
Neither of those are for sale.
Warner bros, Ubisoft, and segments of square were for sale.
Hogwarts will keep WB affloat. Plus Sony owning WB games would be weird, since their movies are competitors.
Ubisoft might not be appealing to Sony.
Segments of SE would be the only acquisition that makes sense, they could buy final fantasy devs and the IP.
Sony cant afford take two, which is not on sale.
Last edited:
Rubim
Member
Because many of the sales are actually impossible? Rofl.
What kinda of WHAT IF are you playing my dude.
Ass of Can Whooping
Gold Member
Nothing impossible about them.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
POKEYCLYDE
Member
In a hypothetical world where these publishers are on sale and Microsoft isn't willing to outbid them, I agree that T2 would trigger a similar type of investigation that we are seeing with ABK. (Centered around GTA and possibly their 2K series)
As for the others, I could see them acquiring a couple without much issue, but as the purchases piled up they'd run into more and more trouble. Maybe even the first acquistion of say Square Enix would be met with scrutiny. For 2 reasons really:
1) These regulators through this thorough investigation have a better understanding of the games industry. So they would know Sony is the market leader in console gaming. I would guess that acquistions from the market lead position is harder. I don't think they would be blocked per se, but perhaps go into phase 2, possible remedies as well. But then again, Sony isn't a tech giant, so maybe they wouldn't have any trouble.
2) Microsoft would complain in the same way Sony is complaining now. Would probably force it into Phase 2 investigations, tying up Sony in whatever acquisition they are making at the time.
If Microsoft wasn't tied up with Activision right now, I think they'd be talking with Ubisoft. And if Sony were tied up trying to get Square Enix and for example, Capcom was in a dire situation, looking for a buyer. Sony probably couldn't go for them.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
This is actually an interesting point.
Suppose Sony is acquiring Square-Enix. What exactly would Microsoft complain about? That Final Fantasy, SE's biggest IP, will be not come on Xbox anymore? It already doesn't come to Xbox. So the acquisition wouldn't change much.
Sony, on the other hand, is complaining about Call of Duty, because COD has a bigger community on PS than Xbox. And that's a legit point.
This makes me think perhaps Sony was playing 4-D chess all along with Final Fantasy, Square Enix, planning for the possible acquisition, and circumventing regulatory actions.
I think Ubisoft talked with almost all publishers/MS/Sony, and none picked them up. Ubisoft is extremely bloated and a nightmare to manage.
Same thing that Nvidia is 'complaining' about in theory, the loss of a potential supplier. I don't think it would hold too much water anyways.
Last edited:
POKEYCLYDE
Member
The complaint would probably center around their console dominance. For Square Enix specifically, I think that is the easiest acquisition for Sony to make seeing as they are engaging in exclusivity deals and closely associating Final Fantasy with the Playstation brand.
If we take this out of the hypothetical world, I would say if Sony plans on acquiring SE, to do it sooner rather than later. Microsoft may be hesitant to jump directly into another publisher acquisition after this one. So Sony should strike while Microsoft has cold feet. Because SE is publicly traded, right? They would have a fiduciary duty to get the highest price for their shareholders. And if Microsoft is in a bidding mood, we could very likely see SE go to Xbox.
3liteDragon
Member
Kotick on CNBC today, nothing new.
Nothing interesting in this clip.
The weird calling out of Chinese and Japanese companies is a bit tired but ehh, play all the cards that you have.
POKEYCLYDE
Member
Placating shareholders after the NYT article about the CMA (that is supposedly wrong).
jm89
Member
I mean he was always going to say that right?
GHG
Gold Member
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
Why are you posting a tweet of a random Reee post? What is this trash?
Thirty7ven
Banned
“I don’t think I lied, why would I lie?”
Also more jingoism, which is mighty rich coming from such global capitalists.
Just pure scumbags, part of me almost wants to see the deal going through just because they belong together.
Last edited:
gothmog
Gold Member
What else are they going to say? Nope, not going through and then watching their stock prices drop?
At this point the only reason Sony is objecting is obviously and simply because Sony doesn't want, and wants to avoid having to compete against an Xbox controlling the ABK catalog.
It is not whether COD will come out on PS5 or anything, Sony already knows that COD will continue on PS5, but it does not want to lose the advantage and revenue of being the base platform for COD. Sony wants to continue having the exclusive content, the marketing and that PS5 continues to be the platform for esports..... and it wants to continue having Diablo, Crash, etc...
Sony has seen that it can influence the Regulators and is putting all its put effort into it knowing that it have nothing to lose at this point except for an angry MS who will surely fight any attempt by Sony to buy any publisher.
It is within their right to defend their interests and it seems that it can work out, but it is ridiculous to want to look for a a more kind or dignified reason to disguise the real reason that is none other than the fear of having to compete with an Xbox controlling the ABK catalog.
Pelta88
Member
There's a ton of info in this clip if you listen to Kotics wording. He says "Activision needs to compete against Japanese and Chinese companies"
What?
He's basically saying ATVI needs to compete against Sony. While sidestepping the fact that the majority of Activision's sales on console come directly from a Japanese company, aka Sony, by a huge margin.
That, my fellow armchair analysts, is what you call a peek behind the curtain!
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I think mainly he's referring the Tencent boogyman.
Last edited:
Pelta88
Member
Tenecent owns 5% of Activision shares and stands to benefit to the tune of an additional 3.5 Billion if the sale goes through. So Kotic can not be talking about them.
Last edited:
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
It's because it wouldn't affect them.
People cry when it affects them, and troll when it benefits them.
NickFire
Member
Yes, 100%. There is no chance he will say anything negative about the deal. If he spoked negatively he would be jeopardizing the deal itself (which he wants), and the buyout fees if it does not happen. Plus he might be hoping to keep his job under MS too.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Starfield's PS exclusivity has never been more than an unsubstantiated rumor by literally one person. And the other parts of that rumor have already been proven wrong.
People claim that Sony was getting a timed-exclusivity deal for Starfield. At the same time, they also say that there was never a PS5 version of Starfield in development.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked