bitbydeath
Member
Just wait til you get married.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
laynelane
Member
For someone who invested a large sum of money in this and is a self-proclaimed X-Bot, this is probably a lot to deal with.
Last edited:
In Cold Blood
Banned
Microsoft, just like Sony, play in different market areas. Each company tries to increase their presence in those different areas. Because the Sony Playstation is the dominate market player in gaming, that doesn't mean that Sony can't try to improve their position in the Camera area, or the Movie area.
So neither Sony nor MS should be held back from improving their market position in one area because they are dominate in another.
SneakersSO
Member
In a hypothetical where this deal doesn't go through, it will be on ATVI to ensure their business and portfolio is as strong as possible. I'm not saying they won't have any incentive or there isn't a big enough check MS could write that would get ATVI to do this, but I highly doubt MS would have the will to do this, nor would ATVI have the will to even try because again - the PS audience is a massive part of CoD.
This also would likely result in pretty big consumer backlash I imagine, not that it'll matter much, but if its for one game? Sony won't give a shit. There is no such thing as bad blood in the corporate world - ATVI relies on Sony as a significant source of their income, and should they remain independent, they'll continue to do so. MS will have far bigger fish to fry on their end if this deal doesn't go through.
In Cold Blood
Banned
Sure, just like Sony used Playstation money to prop up other areas they were involved in like PCs, Consumer Electronics and other things.
You can play that game a hundred different ways. Sony is dominate in the entertainment area. Music, movies and gaming. Sony might use their advantage in one area, say movie rights to Spiderman, to leverage a benefit in another area, like taking the Spiderrman franchise away from Xbox and making it exclusive in gaming.
Sony might use their game IPs to increase their footprint in other media, like movies. Is that an unfair advantage?
bitbydeath
Member
Sony would face similar scrutiny if they tried to purchase Disney, that's just how it works.
Hero of Spielberg
Member
But not because the money for the acquisition came from Playstation.
bitbydeath
Member
No, because of Disney being the biggest in the industry, just like Activision.
Hero of Spielberg
Member
Yes, but you said 'Xbox division can rely on Microsoft's money to gain an unfair advantage in the gaming market.' which is incorrect ... well if properly regulated.
bitbydeath
Member
Did I?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Hero of Spielberg
Member
Sorry, it was someone else. My bad
Astray
Member
I saw something like this coming when Nadella suddenly went on about Xbox's share in Japan and Kotick showed his usual belligerent self.
I think this deal is likely gonna die because of this. It's one thing to have to offer COD for 10 years (still a laughable offer for reasons I went into earlier on the thread), but to have to do more than that, to the point of divesting entire pillars of ABK's business is definitely gonna place a wedge between Activision and Microsoft.
I think this deal is likely gonna die because of this. It's one thing to have to offer COD for 10 years (still a laughable offer for reasons I went into earlier on the thread), but to have to do more than that, to the point of divesting entire pillars of ABK's business is definitely gonna place a wedge between Activision and Microsoft.
Jaybe
Member
gona just drop it for fun
There will be a lot of egg on Satya's and Phil's faces if the acquisition doesn't get approved
bitbydeath
Member
No problem, for that statement i'd say it depends on the frequency of it occurring that could lead to it being an issue.
Although if someone gets so big and needs broken up then that's a whole different discussion.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
And to think.
The activision deal probably sealed the Bungie acquisition from Sony, lol.
I wonder if Microsoft will put their money where their mouth is and buy the parts of Activision that remain after spinning off CoD into its own company. The deal is really all about King and mobile? Lol, okay, prove it then...
El Pistolero
Banned
Followed a couple of Xbox podcasts, and the faces were livid...They suggested in both instances that MS either sell the COD IP and keep the teams, or abondon the british market once and for all. 
Hero of Spielberg
Member
Agreed. Every acquisition should be regulated based on what the outcome will be.
Yes, if the entity becomes so big that it has negative effects on competition / consumers in that industry then it should be blocked, divested, whatever. I think what I was getting at (and getting mixed up on who I was responding to in the process!) was that regardless of MS size as a business overall, the acquisition should be regulated based on what it would do in the games industry rather than how much bigger will it make MS overall. Although I do believe they are receiving additional scrutiny due to the size of MS as a whole.
Last edited:
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
Followed a couple of Xbox podcasts, and the faces were livid...They suggested in both instances that MS either sell the COD IP and keep the teams, or abondon the british market once and for all.
Is it even possible that Microsoft would buy Activision knowing they couldn't sell their games in the UK? lmao....
gona just drop it for fun
I don't even think him asking to look at Japan is that controversial, Japan will be looking at it. Him complaining about Apple and Google though and saying perhaps somebody should look at that is the stupidest whataboutism I've heard from him though. Regulators are looking at that Nadella. Doesn't mean they're going to turn a blind eye to your shit.
Last edited:
In Cold Blood
Banned
Every major acquisition over a certain amount faces scrutiny.
Zenimax was only 7.5 Billion and it also had to go through regulators.
We are talking about the number 4 gaming company buying a publisher which will take them to number 3. That does not make a monopoly and does not lessen competition.
Gaming isn't a finite resource.
Sony could set up 5 new studios. They could make more teams and develop more games.
This is the problem with the CMA.
They think that by a person playing on an xbox and not been able to play spiderman, that that is anti consumer. Their mindset seems to be that a gamer on Xbox or PS should be able to play all the games on either console.
That's just not how console gaming works. It's the exclusive content that drives competition.
The PS5 and XSX are a mid range PC. There is nothing special about either machine. What is special is the games MS and Sony bring to them.
That's the value.
If the CMA wants to be fair, tell Sony that they can no longer pay to take games and content away from Xbox. If anything is anti consumer it's third party exclusives.
bitbydeath
Member
That doesn't matter, we're talking the largest 3rd party publisher there is. If somebody is going to be blocked from sale, it's them.
That's a strange take. Gaming isn't a finite resource but what industry is then exactly when it comes to acquisitions?
If PepsiCo and The Coca-Cola Company decide to merge I don't think the regulators response would be "well anybody can make their own drinks. Beverages aren't finite."
Loomy
Thinks Microaggressions are Real
I've been wanting to respond to this point for a while now, since it comes up every other page.
Microsoft/XBox is not a plucky underdog upstart here. They've been in the industry directly for over 20 years now. They've have plenty of opportunities to cultivate the relationships Sony has and they have more money to help those relationships along than Sony will ever have. There's nothing stopping Microsoft/Xbox from making those same deals that Sony is making or competing with Sony for those deals.
The difference here is that Microsoft is denying Sony the chance to even compete (and no, I don't believe they're going to make ABK games multiplatform. The only evidence of their potential action we have is the Zenimax acquisition).
The reality here is that Microsoft has backed themselves into a corner where in order to justify the long term existence of GamePass they need to own more content than they're capable of producing.
Loomy
Thinks Microaggressions are Real
gona just drop it for fun
Man, I wish just once someone would ask Satya or Phil to explain exactly why or how this deal would bring more competitiveness.
TheUndeadGamer
Member
Off-topic: But why is the Azure revenue growth going down YoY?
I'm wondering what MS and Activision will do now. Hmmm
I'm wondering what MS and Activision will do now. Hmmm
El Pistolero
Banned
Would have been moved had MS not snatch all of Zenimax IPs with a single transaction. It's like you are living in a different universe, where Fallout, Doom, Wolfeinstein, Elders Scrolls...and many more IPs, will still be on their way to the Playstation.
Last edited:
TheGodfather07
Member
You don't think Microsoft buying mega publishers is an uncompetitive environment? If its fair, can Sony match such an acquisition of the same calibre? Everybody knows they cant. That's what this is about. Not Microsofts position in the industry. You dont get to just buy whatever ips you want just because you have the least marketshare. Regulators are there to stop just that. Maybe it's time for Microsoft to realise they actually need to start putting in the work and creating their own ips.
Last edited:
GhostOfTsu
Banned
But MS is allowed to keep buying IPs to make them exclusive? It's not third party anymore if MS buys them so that's fair?
What kind of logic is that.
Forcing third-parties to make ports to every console is also not a solution. It takes resources and who's gonna pay?
Last edited:
MasterCornholio
Member
Bobby Kotick says UK will be the "Death Valley" of tech if the Activision deal isn't approved
What he means is that you will get dehydrated and start hallucinating Sting.
Been there done that.
P.S I didn't see sting though. Boobs were nice.
POKEYCLYDE
Member
The man is recovering from a stroke. Have some human decency.
FalsettoVibe
Member
Oh snap....that sucks. I was wondering why I hadn't heard anything from him.
aries_71
Junior Member
I think that's highly unlikely. Still, it would be ironic and fun to see it. Competition-wise that would tragic for the UK consumer.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
I can't believe they touched on this. Wow.Things you shouldn't say when attempting to convince regulators you have no ill-intentions:
If it's not the case (or not under consideration) then it doesn't need to be talked about or defended.
And then, based on this "hypothetical" scenario, the SIE submitted scenarios that showed a high switch rate, which also made sense to the CMA.
That must have made the CMA's decision so simple and easy.
Nothing1234
Banned
The Zenimax deal definitely hurt Microsoft here.
baphomet
Member
The amount of shit takes in here since it's become obvious this isn't going through is at an all-time, and hilarious high.
1000%
And Phil making sure it was known they weren't stopping with Activision and would continue buying publishers afterwards.
1000%
And Phil making sure it was known they weren't stopping with Activision and would continue buying publishers afterwards.
Last edited:
In Cold Blood
Banned
That's my point. It's ok for Sony to pay their parties to take content away from Xbox, just like it's ok for Xbox to buy a studio and make their games exclusive.
Through the history of consoles, its been all about exclusive games on each platform.
I think there should be more exclusives on both consoles.
I would love to see 50% of games on each console being exclusive and 50% being multiplat.
It would be like Disney Plus and Netflix having 95% the same shows and just 5% original content. How fucked would that be?
It doesn't bother me to see Sony buy more studios, I love it. I will be buying a PS5 in the future, so I will get to play them all.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
Play stupid games win stupid prizes
MS got arrogant AF thinking Activision would be a cakewalk
I get the feeling that this case was so big it made all the regulators shook about the implications of opening Pandora's box where massive 2T tech companies could gobble up whoever they want. This deal is simply too large relative to other gaming companies to go through.
Activision isn't too far removed from the market cap of Sony, and larger than Nintendo FFS. In a single acquisition! Microsoft didn't bat an eye at the cost
laynelane
Member
I think so too. On a personal level, seeing Phil talking about game exclusivity on "case by case basis" pre-closure of the deal and then immediately pivoting to making games exclusive post-closure was frustrating to see. It's good to see that we weren't the only ones paying attention to that little bit of subterfuge.
solidus12
Member
I didn't know that, sorry.
TheUndeadGamer
Member
You don't think MS and ABK won't try to divest anything? Honest question, because I really don't know.
In Cold Blood
Banned
The use of the word "Publisher" is just used to try and make it seem a bigger deal than it us.
Bungie is a Publisher. I didn't see everyone screaming about Sony buying a Publisher.
So ABK is a company with 11 game studios.
They make games for PC, mobile and console.
If Bungie, Nixx, Valkyrie, Bluepoint, Housemarque and Firesprite were all owned by a fictional company called Bob's Publishers, and Sony bought them all at once instead of individually, would it mean more than buying them one at a time? Would you then be against Sony buying them?
The result is the same.
James Sawyer Ford
Banned
Phil's cryptic double speak tactics bit him in the ass
Well deserved after all the garbage he spews
baphomet
Member
You don't think MS and ABK won't try to divest anything? Honest question, because I really don't know.
They want it all. They'll come back with a 15 year promise to keep CoD on competitors, and they'll get shut down.
In Cold Blood
Banned
No, not quite.
Do you know how many games are released at year? Do you know how many game studios there are?
A finite one would be where we have a certain amount of oil in the ground. BP then buys out the other biggest oil reserves in the world.
You can't just invent a new oil reserve.
In games however, new studios are set up every other week. New game IPs come out every year. New game dev talent graduates from college every year.
In Cold Blood
Banned
He should have just pulled a Jim Ryan. Don't comment on it, just do it.
laynelane
Member
He shouldn't have assured regulators they have no incentive to make those titles exclusive and then done so as quickly as possible after. You can make this about Sony as much as you want to, but I'm looking at the same party regulators are - MS.
Hero of Spielberg
Member
No, I don't think it's unfair if one business has greater means to make acquisitions than others, just what the outcome of what that acquisition would be. As far as I'm aware no regulators have raised concerns that Sony couldn't match their bid, more that it may impact their revenue and potentially affect the streaming market, etc. If they did regulate based on what varying companies could pay then I would think that could open a pandora's box of accounting fuckery to obstruct competitors from making acquisitions. But I'm not an M&A expert so I'm not 100%.
- Status