Support NeoGAF

[DarkMage619]

1. Regulators said nothing about cloud relating to this acquisition.

How we investigated the Microsoft and Activision Blizzard merger

Information on how the CMA investigated the merger, and how you can find out more.

www.gov.uk

CMA findings stated "Our phase 1 investigation found Microsoft already has pre-existing strengths that it could use for cloud gaming..."

Read Microsoft’s response to the FTC’s Activision Blizzard lawsuit

All 37 pages.

www.theverge.com

The FTC claimed the deal could “enable Microsoft to suppress competitors to its Xbox gaming consoles and its rapidly growing subscription content and cloud-gaming business.”

It again does not appear like you have been keeping up with the details of this acquisition. The funny thing is that Xbox cloud is not a stand long product but a feature of a alternative payment method and access point to games. It is not an independent market. Even MS doesn't know if cloud gaming can be profitable as a standalone service and Google found out first hand that it is not.

2. The “options” (ok lol but whatever) you claim MS offers negatively impact consumers. The regulators don’t like that - hence the lawsuit.

Being able to access $70 games for a monthly fee over just a traditional retail model is not harmful to consumers. How is giving consumers MORE options on how to pay hurting anyone? The lawsuit in with the FTC is totally political. See Meta for how those lawsuits work out.

3. Sony doesn’t have to prove anything - they are a witnesses to the case not a defendant or a plaintiff. The regulators care about the negative impact on consumers, not Sony.

Even if MS demonstrates that Sony isn’t financially impacted - in fact even if they prove Sony makes more money after this deal - it doesn’t matter.

It’s not MS vs Sony in court - that battle is only taking place in your mind.

In court, it’s MS vs consumers represented by regulators, and the majority of consumers aren’t happy with the moves MS is making simply because the majority of those users are not on MS platforms, and don’t wish to be forced to change to MS platforms as a result of acquisition.

Sony is the loudest entity claiming that this merger will hurt their ability to compete in video games. They absolutely need to show how this is possible especially when they continue to post record profits and growth. Sony interjected themselves into the process as soon as the acquisition was announced. But yes its only 'in my mind' that Sony has put themselves front and center in this process.

You'll notice MS has not made any requests from Nintendo to provide information about their business. That's because Nintendo isn't trying to stop the acquisition they in fact they reached an agreement with MS and stand to benefit from it as well as many other parties. Even Sony was offered the same deal as Nintendo but of course they did not respond and quite possibly could be lying about the details of thr deal to regulators.

How does that make the CMA a "joke"?

The are implying this acquisition could cause consoles to be more expensive when Sony raised prices already in the UK and it had nothing to do with this acquisition. It is pretty silly.

 

[GHG]

I was waiting for you to join. Come on.

I don't even care what the final outcome is at this point.

They are getting dragged through the mud, their clueless myopic followers are finally having to face up to the real world and if they have any ounce of sense they (or anyone else for that matter) won't be trying an acquisition of this size again.

After this saga is over I think we can safely draw a line under the idea of industry wide consolidation for the time being.

 

[Elios83]

You are ignoring the subsequent paragraphs. But I’m not going to try to convince you - no one is right or wrong at this point, because they left the door open to continue. If you consider this the moment of climax and it’s final, go right ahead, entirely up to you.

CMA was clear, for the deal to happen they need to give up COD control completely.
This can be achieved through a formal divestiture or they mention they could consider contracts with similar effects.
The whole 10 years thing that Microsoft proposed and Sony refused is not equivalent to giving up control of COD, it doesn't even address if competitors can have the game day one on their own subscription services.

The point is that either Microsoft accepts a mutilated deal without control on COD or the deal is done.

 

[Mr Moose]

But isn't Xbox the lowest selling console brand in the UK?

Last year they were all pretty close. MicroSoft don't release numbers.

 

[Three]

"Having these games on a streaming service would be crucial, as UK customers have to buy a console to play them".
Just shows that literally no one in the CMA knows what they are talking about.

I am surprised if they actually use computers at the CMA's office and doesnt only rely on pen and paper, as they possibly never have seen any sort of hardware or peripherals in real life.

Wat?

Not sure what you're saying here. The CMA are saying for those who can't afford a console or gaming PC and use cloud gaming this acquisition will stifle competition in the cloud gaming space and raise their prices or lower choice.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Retarded, MS is one of the few who barely raised prices.

Yeah, nah, they charge the same price now as Sony.

 

[Topher]

At this point, my annoyance with CMA has made my own judgment into a joke and I agree that the text could be read the way you described it. I say could, because given CMA's lack of understanding of the gaming market, they could very well mean it in the way that they think you need expensive consoles for cloud gaming.

he are implying this acquisition could cause consoles to be more expensive when Sony raised prices already in the UK and it had nothing to do with this acquisition. It is pretty silly.

I'm talking about this:

This is not saying anything about making consoles more expensive. Not even implying it.

 

[feynoob]

Seems like a reasonable guy....

Why can't they just be clear?

 

[SenjutsuSage]

So CMA has opened the door, very slightly to the strictest of all possible behavioral remedies. And if Microsoft doesn't come up with something good, they will want full divestiture of either COD business or Blizzard business to allow the deal to go through.

In other words, commit to all games multi-plat for 20 years, or even permanently if they won't budge for 20 years. Allow all competitors license access to ABK games on their game pass and cloud competitors, including Sony, Nvidia etc.

Offer Sony new COD games day one on ps+ for up to a year then afterwards they need to pay to extend.

But if the current situation stands, looks like I owe thicc_girls_are_teh_best a game possibly. Will watch. They straight adopted all Sony talking points. FTC seems to have successfully influenced it. But there is still hope, but Microsoft's remedy offers will have to be ironclad to avoid divesting.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Ok guys, less innovation for UK gamers.
Pack it up boys and go and play the 567th edition of CoD.

Now THAT is innovation.

Also, go pay 70 each game instead of an affordable subscription.

Now THAT is lower prices.

And don't forget, wait for the game you want one year or two to be available in PC and Xbox.

Now THAT is power of choice.

you sub to game pass don't you?

 

[Aguero9320]

I often ignore what I don’t want to hear.

Very wise, leads to a less stress filled existence lol.

Fascinating to see what happens next here though. I actually think beneath the surface this release makes it a little more likely that the deal will close, and sooner than I expected, but that could well be a misread.

 

[Heisenberg007]

I don't even care what the final outcome is at this point.

They are getting dragged through the mud, their clueless myopic followers are finally having to face up to the real world and if they have any ounce of sense they (or anyone else for that matter) won't be trying an acquisition of this size again.

After this saga is over I think we can safely draw a line under the idea of industry wide consolidation for the time being.

Yeah on a serious note, I hope Microsoft stops this acquisition madness and looks inwards and focus on its games.

They could not manage 5 studios. Now they have 23 studios. And they were gonna have 11 more if this acquisition was approved. What the hell! That's not sustainable or productive or efficient.

Focus on producing good games. You're gonna get ABK games anyway. Spend the money, not on acquisition, but on talent, tools, and studios. Give your gamers some must-play games and increase your market share gradually and organically, so you can sustain it.

 

[T4keD0wN]

The CMA provisionally found that weakening competition by restricting the access that other platforms have to Activision’s games could substantially reduce the competition between Xbox and PlayStation in the UK, in turn harming UK gamers.

Microsoft’s proposed acquisition of Activision could result in higher prices, fewer choices, or less innovation for UK gamers.

So the CMA couldnt dig up anything better or a single piece of evidence and all they have is unfounded speculations that have already been adressed by offering 10 years of parity on content, pricing, features, quality and playability.

Microsoft lawyers should have an easy time dealing with these baseless concerns, theres no way CMA can stop this if they have no real arguments and the case goes to court. They are doign a great job delaying it though.

 

[Ash Sparrow]

You guys saying the deal is dead need to take your time and read again.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Welcome to Death Valley.

 

[mansoor1980]

 

[GHG]

So CMA has opened the door, very slightly to the strictest of all possible behavioral remedies. And if Microsoft doesn't come up with something good, they will want full divestiture of either COD business or Blizzard business to allow the deal to go through.

In other words, commit to all games multi-plat for 20 years, or even permanently if they won't budge for 20 years. Allow all competitors license access to ABK games on their game pass and cloud competitors, including Sony, Nvidia etc.

Offer Sony new COD games day one on ps+ for up to a year then afterwards they need to pay to extend.

But if the current situation stands, looks like I owe thicc_girls_are_teh_best a game possibly. Will watch. They straight adopted all Sony talking points. FTC seems to have successfully influenced it. But there is still hope, but Microsoft's remedy offers will have to be ironclad to avoid divesting.

When this man has a reasonable assessment of the situation you know shit just got real.

Shout louder for your friends at the back.

 

[Kurimao]

 

[jm89]

So CMA has opened the door, very slightly to the strictest of all possible behavioral remedies. And if Microsoft doesn't come up with something good, they will want full divestiture of either COD business or Blizzard business to allow the deal to go through.

In other words, commit to all games multi-plat for 20 years, or even permanently if they won't budge for 20 years. Allow all competitors license access to ABK games on their game pass and cloud competitors, including Sony, Nvidia etc.

Offer Sony new COD games day one on ps+ for up to a year then afterwards they need to pay to extend.

But if the current situation stands, looks like I owe thicc_girls_are_teh_best a game possibly. Will watch. They straight adopted all Sony talking points. FTC seems to have successfully influenced it. But there is still hope, but Microsoft's remedy offers will have to be ironclad to avoid divesting.

Phew. I was preparing a team from gaf to do a welfare check.

 

[mrmustard]

That deal is more entertaining than most of the stuff Netflix recently made.

 

[DenchDeckard]

Look, I'm only pointing out that MS didn't step away from moneyhats after the Tomb Raider backlash. They continued to do moneyhats like Dead Rising 4 and the games I mentioned. don't want to get into a silly debate about what's 'last gen' or AAA or whatever. They continued to do them and went on an acquisition spree at around 2018 while still doing those moneyhats.

Deffo, feels like money hats are ok for MS until its a game that other people want. I dont think anyone cared about medium but High On Life caused a stir once it got some hype.

Saying this, comparing the medium or High On Life to heavy weights like Final Fantasy is so funny to me.

 

[Edmund]

I'm talking about this:

This is not saying anything about making consoles more expensive. Not even implying it.

wat?

 

[nani17]

Ok guys, less innovation for UK gamers.
Pack it up boys and go and play the 567th edition of CoD.

Now THAT is innovation.

Also, go pay 70 each game instead of an affordable subscription.

Now THAT is lower prices.

And don't forget, wait for the game you want one year or two to be available in PC and Xbox.

Now THAT is power of choice.

Yeah but that is from the point if you owned an Xbox. If you don't own one you can't get this affordable subscription because game pass isn't on PlayStation. I don't understand why people can't see that MS wants to be the Netflix of gaming and buying up all around adds to this plan.

Not only that they keep saying COD will be on PlayStation, In what way? Day one ???? with all content ??? we don't know

 

[Makoto-Yuki]

Knowing the UK government they will let Microsoft pass it because it fucks over everyone. That's to say, everyone except the rich and powerful.

The Tory government don't give a flying fuck if people have less choices and have to spend more money LMFAO. That's pretty much what they exist for.... to fuck over those with less money and have more control over them.

 

[Topher]

So CMA has opened the door, very slightly to the strictest of all possible behavioral remedies. And if Microsoft doesn't come up with something good, they will want full divestiture of either COD business or Blizzard business to allow the deal to go through.

In other words, commit to all games multi-plat for 20 years, or even permanently if they won't budge for 20 years. Allow all competitors license access to ABK games on their game pass and cloud competitors, including Sony, Nvidia etc.

Offer Sony new COD games day one on ps+ for up to a year then afterwards they need to pay to extend.

But if the current situation stands, looks like I owe thicc_girls_are_teh_best a game possibly. Will watch. They straight adopted all Sony talking points. FTC seems to have successfully influenced it. But there is still hope, but Microsoft's remedy offers will have to be ironclad to avoid divesting.

 

[Aguero9320]

In other words, commit to all games multi-plat for 20 years, or even permanently if they won't budge for 20 years. Allow all competitors license access to ABK games on their game pass and cloud competitors, including Sony, Nvidia etc.

I don’t think the first part of that paragraph is what they are asking, and I don’t think it will extend to ‘all’ ABK games - that would be too much.

I do think they want cloud availability included in Microsoft’s guarantee for COD, which I don’t think was present earlier, and they want Microsoft to propose terms - which will actually be difficult, as how do you quantify value and set the cost? It can’t be what Microsoft pay as that would be nothing, and it’s hard to set a fair market value on an emerging medium. Plus Microsoft will want to add it at launch, which means the cost to license it for other cloud platforms with parity would have to be astronomical.

Glad I don’t have to try and work that out lol.

 

[rhodesianshepard]

Ten years would be over an entire console generation. If Sony can't come up with a way to offset the potential loss of revenue from losing COD in ten years then it deserves to take the impact. The market doesn't exist to prop up Sony's business model.

Billions of dollars and many years of development have been spent to perfect the COD formula. Realistically, it's an impossible game to compete with, not so much in terms of polished gameplay, but as a brand name. It would be like if Sony owned Rockstar games, and they just told Microsoft to create a GTA of their own to compete. It's just not possible

 

[feynoob]

If this deal fails, prepare for madness guys.
Both companies will seriously money hat big games.

 

[Majukun]

sound like pretty baseless accusations to be frank, but i'm not the one in charge to decide

and i don't play actibliz games nor have an xbox, so...

 

[GHG]

Nvidia are actually the real OG's here.

Jensen, I salute you.

 

[laynelane]

The CMA’s provisional findings note that this strategy, of buying gaming studios and making their content exclusive to Microsoft’s platforms, has been used by Microsoft following several previous acquisitions of games studios.

You noticed that bit too, huh?

 

[Tiago Rodrigues]

If this deal fails, prepare for madness guys.
Both companies will seriously money hat big games.

That's already happening though?

 

[reinking]

wat?

You are misunderstanding what the CMA is saying. I did the same thing at first glance.

 

[jm89]

For entertainment Hogworts legacy or meltdowns?

Decision decisions

 

[DForce]

There is always a danger reading between the lines, but it sounds to me like they would accept Microsoft’s 10 year commitment, it just doesn’t exist officially yet. Which makes perfect sense - it completely assuages any concerns (or can, perhaps if extended to include cloud somehow).

Seems to open the door for Microsoft providing an iron clad, legally enforceable guarantee on COD parity (stupid concept). CMA gets to look strong, Microsoft does what it had already agreed to. Politics wins.

That deal with Nintendo wasn’t as stupid as people made out. Anyone would think (probably) the best corporate lawyers in the world knew something about what they were doing…

The CMA suggested either selling the division or selling Call of Duty to get the deal through.

Sony doesn't have to accept the 10-year commitment, but if that did, then they would possibly reduce the CMA's concerns because their competitor (Sony) is not concerned beyond the 10-year deal.

Based on what the CMA wants, it's going to take a lot more than just a 10-year deal.

 

[mansoor1980]

You noticed that bit too, huh?

well they keep saying competition and choice is good for the industry , but at the same time have a history of buying out the competition and leaving limited choices for the audience , unfortunately for them CMA are not dumbasses

 

[feynoob]

That's already happening though?

It's not. MS still hasn't taken action like Sony.

 

[Spitfire098]

How I feel reading comments from the likes of Jez Cordon and team Green across the internet today.

 

[Topher]

Deffo, feels like money hats are ok for MS until its a game that other people want. I dont think anyone cared about medium but High On Life caused a stir once it got some hype.

Saying this, comparing the medium or High On Life to heavy weights like Final Fantasy is so funny to me.

Microsoft's money hatting is about getting more games on Game Pass so they are targeting the AA market rather than AAA as that isn't feasible for a subscription service. Doesn't make it any less money hatting though.

 

[Shut0wen]

As much as i hate bobby he was right in his recent interview with cbnc, regulators have no idea, MS would be incredibly dumb making cod an exclusive and even if they did how many people would jump consoles? I cant see it being significant especially since a majority of people that have playstations have had nothing but playstation, ps3 one of the worst consoles to ever come out still sold well due to loyalty

 

[Interfectum]

But internet experts told me this was a done deal. Xbox fanatics on Twitter already consider Diablo an Xbox franchise.

 

[//DEVIL//]

Via VGC:

Lol. They want to give cod 10 years on playstation. That's what MS said it will do . They knew what CMA wanted in advance. This deal in UK will go through despite Jimbo's lies and false claims.

What they saying here pretty much from my understanding that as long as there is 10 years of multiplatform call of duty , then they are ok lol

 

[GHG]

That's already happening though?

We're supposed to believe Microsoft have been fighting with both hands tied behind their backs this whole time when it comes to securing high quality exclusive deals and development partnerships for the Xbox ecosystem.

Phil said they don't like exclusivity so it must be true, nevermind the body of evidence in front of our faces.

 

[Reizo Ryuu]

I don't understand, how is 10 years of being able to access the same game anywhere you want less choice than one platform having the "best" feature complete version over all others, for a full cycle until a sequel comes out?

 

[anthony2690]

Maybe they shouldn't have followed Sony's suit to raise prices to $70

Ah well, guess I will be playing Diablo 4 all by myself XD

 

[envyzeal]

Damn I can’t stop seeing threads that need this

 

[FIREKNIGHT2029]

Looks like Phil's words came back to bite him in the ass lol.


So if MS doesn't agree to CMA's terms the deal is nuked I guess. CMA is basically calling their bluff about COD not being important to them and how the real thing they want in the acquisition is King and Candy Crush.

I think MS will fold. Everyone knows this deal was about COD in GamePass. I'm not fooled by Phil and his PR bullshit about not needing COD.

Jez Corden is having a full blown meltdown on Twitter. I think it's almost safe to say the deal is toast.

 

[Lasha]

Billions of dollars and many years of development have been spent to perfect the COD formula. Realistically, it's an impossible game to compete with, not so much in terms of polished gameplay, but as a brand name. It would be like if Sony owned Rockstar games, and they just told Microsoft to create a GTA of their own to compete. It's just not possible

Competing doesn't mean making another COD. Nintendo competes perfectly well by adapting to the market. A decade is enough time to come up with alternative strategies and make up for the revenue.

 

[mrmustard]

Common sense has prevailed here in the U.K it seems.

First the Brexit and now this. U.K. has a streak of wise decisions.

 

[gothmog]

CMA decision:

(a) Requiring a partial divestiture of Activision Blizzard, Inc. This may be:
(i) Divestiture of the business associated with Call of Duty;
(ii) DivestitureoftheActivisionsegmentofActivisionBlizzard,Inc.(the Activision segment), which would include the business associated with Call of Duty;
(iii) Divestiture of the Activision segment and the Blizzard segment (the Blizzard segment) of Activision Blizzard, Inc., which would include the business associated with Call of Duty and World of Warcraft, among other titles.
(b) Prohibition of the merger.

Remedies are so significant that the acquisition would be neutralized for Microsoft.

Lol. I've been saying that these were the only remedies these regulators would agree to. And here they are.

I expect we'll see the deal's end this week.