Support NeoGAF

[Ass of Can Whooping]

You are failing to grasp the points I'm making acroas multioke messages. Tell yourself whatever helps you sleeo at night.

You have two messages

One is that ActBliz is going to act petty and against shareholder interests (el oh el)

The other is MS is going to outbid Sony for marketing rights which they so far have had no interest in (el oh el)

 

[TheGodfather07]

We will always remember this time period. February 2023, we witnessed a real miracle! Phil Spencer was silent!

 

[mrmustard]

I don't get why Microsoft doesn't take everything bar call of duty. That would be so much more appealing.

Keep it multi plat and open to any cloud service etc and just put all the blizzard games and more on game pass?

I'm pretty sure MS never planned to make COD full exclusive. It's just too much money they would have to pass on. Also Minecraft is still multi and Dungeons and Legends too.

 

[Thirty7ven]

Would love to see MS actually divest AB and only get King, it would be amazing to read all the praise.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Yeah, sorry didn't read your whole post at first. Regardless, the football team I support hadn't won a flag for 60 years until last year! Just b cause something hasn't happened for a while, doesn't mean it won't

That's ignoring the structural realities of the CMA and its relationship to the courts there. The CMA has broad powers and the courts recognize that. To cut the legs off the CMA by overruling their decision would open a floodgate and set a new precedence.

Precedence is literally what matters in legal situations, this isn't football.

The CMA allowed a merger to go through that they said reduced SLC, but the only reason they allowed it to go through on behavioral remedies is because the company being acquired was already going out of business.

None of that applies here.

Everything that the CMA has written here and their decisions in the past tell us this deal has been blocked and will be blocked as is. We'll see if Microsoft will agree to any structural remedies, but I don't see that being the case, maybe they are genuinely interested in still buying the rest of the company sans CoD.

 

[BeardGawd]

You have two messages

One is that ActBliz is going to act petty and against shareholder interests (el oh el)

The other is MS is going to outbid Sony for marketing rights which they so far have had no interest in (el oh el)

Neither of those are mutually exclusive. What are you not understanding?

Sony doing this gives Activision and Kotick incentive to break the status quo. They still release on PS but the perks go to Xbox. OBVIOUSLY this wasn't going to happen for free which I already stated and anyone with a brain expects MS to pay for it.

 

[PropellerEar]

By all means tell me how Sony and COD are the only game in town and why it should be protected? Analyse away.

This is what a multiplatform publisher can achieve:

This is good for the whole gaming industry.

 

[TheGodfather07]

Sony were just as ruthless in trying to stop the deal as Microsoft were in trying to make the deal. It's pretty much a direct attack on sony, so why shouldn't sony attack back in every way they can?

Looks like they come out getting what they wanted because the regulators have the same view as sony does. Activision and cod specifically are way too big for this to be allowed with Microsoft having any control in any time period. Whether it's 10 or even 20 years from now. Microsoft and Activision need to take the L and get back to normal business.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Neither of those are mutually exclusive. What are you not understanding?

Sony doing this gives Activision and Kotick incentive to break the status quo. They still release on PS but the perks go to Xbox. OBVIOUSLY this wasn't going to happen for free which I already stated and anyone with a brain expects MS to pay for it.

The only thing that was ever needed to break the status quo is MS willing to pay and actually wants to. There doesn't need to be an excuse. You really this much a dumbass?

 

[Hero of Spielberg]

That's ignoring the structural realities of the CMA and its relationship to the courts there. The CMA has broad powers and the courts recognize that. To cut the legs off the CMA by overruling their decision would open a floodgate and set a new precedence.

Precedence is literally what matters in legal situations, this isn't football.

The CMA allowed a merger to go through that they said reduced SLC, but the only reason they allowed it to go through on behavioral remedies is because the company being acquired was already going out of business.

None of that applies here.

Everything that the CMA has written here and their decisions in the past tell us this deal has been blocked and will be blocked as is. We'll see if Microsoft will agree to any structural remedies, but I don't see that being the case, maybe they are genuinely interested in still buying the rest of the company sans CoD.

I think the structural remedies probably sound quite appealing to MS tbh. Divest COD and then use remaining budget to put it on GP as part of their strategy to grow Gamepass.

MS themselves have stated that thus deal was more than COD, guess this will test their metal, so to speak

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Would love to see MS actually divest AB and only get King, it would be amazing to read all the praise.

The CMA has allowed them to divest from just CoD. I think they'd rather keep ABK if they went this route. They aren't going to get great market value for Activision and Blizzard withotu CoD.

 

[demigod]

You seem to miss, that that's exactly my point, and exactly why "parity" isn't something that Microsoft can promise to a satisfactory degree. Microsoft's version of parity reduces competition and innovation.

Sony could have PS6 be twice as powerful as the next xbox, but if Microsoft won't take advantage of that power, so that they can still sell CoD on their system even though Sony is taking a loss on their very powerful PS6, which consumers like, but they still want CoD, it means consumers have been hurt in the process. This is what the CMA is going to look at in terms of an ever-changing dynamic market.

I think parity means not gimping your software on the competitor's hardware. Look at psychonauts 2 for PS5. Also The Witcher 3(xbox had marketing) for xbox one x got an upgrade but the ps4 pro didn't.

 

[Setsuna Mudou]

Part of this is Activision's fault. They attached themselves to sony with long marketing deals and game exclusivity (there have been other games they released that did not appear on xbox).

In the end they based too much of thier business off playstation. Now when they was to sell and cash out, sony does everything it can to prevent it as COD IS bigger then any single first party game. Its the gta situation all over again.

Activision put all its eggs in one basket.

What they should have done is what Ea did at the start of the 360 ps3 gen. They decided to put more weight behind xbox to level the playing field and prevent one platform from getting too big. It could have been easy for them to simply stick with sony after ps2, which would have had a similar effect like it did with the dreamcast.

Careful there

 

[Panajev2001a]

Where's the content starvation? PS players feast by all accounts.

No thanks to new tentpole Bethesda/Zenimax games going from Multiplatform to exclusive to MS ecosystem. Also, jobs of regulators should be preventing giving this kind of monopolistic power / leverage to be able to content starve your competitors in the future not wait after the fact.

Contracts are literally the fundamental underpinning of the capitalist system. But in this situation they're no good?

Sorry, are you monumentally naive or are you intentionally trying to gaslight people here? Mix of both?

You talk about true colours and living on other planets … the irony.

Indeed mate, indeed .

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I think parity means not gimping your software on the competitor's hardware. Look at psychonauts 2 for PS5. Also The Witcher 3(xbox had marketing) for xbox one x got an upgrade but the ps4 pro didn't.

So if the PS6 is significantly more powerful than the next xbox, wouldn't the game be gimped if it doesn't take advantage of that hardware advantage?

If Sony releases a PS6 Pro, will Microsoft enhance the game on it?

 

[Panajev2001a]

So you are saying that games that were in development long before the Zenimax acquisition never had a ps4/ps5 version planned?
Right....

Yeah this is cognitive dissonance to the extreme.

 

[BeardGawd]

The only thing that was ever needed to break the status quo is MS willing to pay the price. There doesn't need to be an excuse. You really this much a dumbass?

Frankly you're the dumbass as existing relationships play a part in business deals all the time. If you sour that relationship yes you present an opening for a competitor when before they may have been content with the status quo with the market leader.

 

[Hero of Spielberg]

No thanks to new tentpole Bethesda/Zenimax games going from Multiplatform to exclusive to MS ecosystem. Also, jobs of regulators should be preventing giving this kind of monopolistic power / leverage to be able to content starve your competitors in the future not wait after the fact.


Sorry, are you monumentally naive or are you intentionally trying to gaslight people here? Mix of both?


Indeed mate, indeed .

Your guide to participating in this discussion:

1) Learn the definition of monopoly
2) Learn the definition of gaslighting

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Frankly you're the dumbass as existing relationships play a part in business deals all the time. If you sour that relationship yes you present an opening for a competitor when before they may have been content with the status quo with the market leader.

Imagine believing deals amount to anything other than outbidding the other player. You're on some type of hopium

 

[Sentenza]

Imagine defending

Bobby Kotick

There's absolutely no need to "defend" Kotick (and from what, anyway?) to understand that you'd have to be the most naive moron on the planet to even imagine a scenario where Sony is NOT attempting to sabotage the deal.

Of course they are, it's their invested interest to.

 

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

Ang again... That fallacious argument that PC is independant, running on freaking Microsoft Windows...

And again misinformation. Mobile, handheld, console by Apple, Google, Nintendo and Sony with a smattering of linux etc too.

None of which run windows and absolutely dwarf PC gaming.

 

[demigod]

So if the PS6 is significantly more powerful than the next xbox, wouldn't the game be gimped if it doesn't take advantage of that hardware advantage?

If Sony releases a PS6 Pro, will Microsoft enhance the game on it?

That's what the word parity means. If they made the game based on the weaker console, the more powerful console is within parity to it.

Now lets say you have the switch 2, xbox next, ps6 in that order of of graphical power. If they made the ps6 the same as the switch 2 then i would agree thats gimping it.

 

[BeardGawd]

Imagine believing deals amount to anything other than outbidding the other player. You're on some type of hopium

Again existing relationships are a factor. There is a risk involved going with the nonmarket leader. It's not just about who pays the most. When PS is stuck with the barebones version just know they did it to themselves.

 

[Sanepar]

he is optimistic the deal will go through.

See? CMA won't be an obstacle, they will probably bribe regulators and on final report they will allow the deal.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Again existing relationships are a factor. There is a risk involved going with the nonmarket leader. It's not just about who pays the most. When PS is stuck with the barebones version just know they did it to themselves.

This guy money apparently isn't enough to ignore the risk of going with the nonmarket leader but this petty excuse somehow makes it better

Sign out of your account and go outside. Your brain is already damaged enough

 

[ToadMan]

From what I've read appeals against CMA decisions can be appealed to CAT then their decisions can be taken to Supreme Court

Either what you read is wrong or you're reading it wrong…

 

[MikeM]

Of course, but let's not simp for Sony making them the good guy. Which a lot of gamers and media are doing.

There are no good guys in the corporate world. Only profits. About time some of you here learn that.

As for good ol Bobby- you only care about getting your golden parachute once the deal closes. Don't pretend to care otherwise- your track record speaks volumes.

 

[BeardGawd]

This guy money apparently isn't enough to ignore the risk of going with the nonmarket leader but this petty excuse somehow makes it better

Sign out of your account and go outside. Your brain is already damaged enough

Says the guy who thinks the board will oust Kotick when they haven't done shit all this time amazing discernment skills you have there. I'm honestly a business genius arguing with you is beneath me.

 

[RoadHazard]

Seems like A DUH Sony is getting heavy do as I say not as I do with exclusives

When has Sony done anything like this? No, buying individual studios that they already had a close relationship with, or single franchise studios, is not the same.

 

[Hero of Spielberg]

Either what you read is wrong or you're reading it wrong…

I saw this one RE Pfizer

Competition and Markets Authority (Respondent) v Flynn Pharma Ltd and another (Appellants) - UK Supreme Court

When considering what costs to award following an appeal before the Competition Appeal Tribunal from an infringement decision of the Competition and Markets Authority, is there a starting point and if so, what is it? In particular, was the Court of Appeal correct to decide that there is a...

www.supremecourt.uk

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

no shit Sherlock. that js their job.

 

[ToadMan]

I saw this one RE Pfizer

http://[URL]https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2020-0113.html

[/URL]

OK - reading and comprehension was the problem… little bit tricky to interpret legal stuff without that hehe.

 

[reksveks]

Honestly don't know we know what the regulators definition of parity would be, I suspect it would be at the feature/mode/content/crossplay level.

Not sure the hypothetical ps6 enforcing vr makes much sense (ignoring for the fact Sony will never do that unless it was a system level 'conversion'), just cause Sony would have parity with the Xbox version plus an additional mode.

 

[reksveks]

Also kinda back to the Ftc, was expecting something from the judge yesterday re the back and forth around the MS subpoena but maybe have missed an order or agreed delay between the two parties.

 

[Hero of Spielberg]

OK - reading and comprehension was the problem… little bit tricky to interpret legal stuff without that hehe.

Was that not what happened?

Edit: I'll add I don't necessarily think this case will go to the Supreme Court. I was discussing possibility of appealing CMA decision

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Says the guy who thinks the board will oust Kotick when they haven't done shit all this time amazing discernment skills you have there. I'm honestly a business genius arguing with you is beneath me.

Bruh, the deal hasn't failed yet. They're not ousting him while he's engaging with that. A bit of common sense goes a long way

 

[aygomyownroad]

If the deal falls through MS should just do what Sony does and pay for exclusivity for every game coming out including COD.

 

[Gudji]

Poor Bobby.

 

[Sanepar]

I still think CMA will rollback until April and will let the deal goes on.

If it was not the case MS and ABK would not be so confident.

 

[Topher]

If the deal falls through MS should just do what Sony does and pay for exclusivity for every game coming out including COD.

Nice exaggeration. MS already pays for timed exclusivity games.

 

[feynoob]

GHG it seems Bo_Hazem is going to feel qatari soon. He will be another oil fan, once qatari buys ManU.
Its very hard to compete with chelsea and Man city money. Now we have to compete with ManU and Newcaste oil money.

 

[Nothing1234]

I still think CMA will rollback until April and will let the deal goes on.

If it was not the case MS and ABK would not be so confident.

Laughs in Nvidia.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Honestly don't know we know what the regulators definition of parity would be, I suspect it would be at the feature/mode/content/crossplay level.

Not sure the hypothetical ps6 enforcing vr makes much sense (ignoring for the fact Sony will never do that unless it was a system level 'conversion'), just cause Sony would have parity with the Xbox version plus an additional mode.

I think parity means not gimping your software on the competitor's hardware. Look at psychonauts 2 for PS5. Also The Witcher 3(xbox had marketing) for xbox one x got an upgrade but the ps4 pro didn't.

The problem you guys are making is it's not the definition of parity to the regulators but from Microsoft.

The regulators will ultimately have a problem with any guarantees of parity because of the dynamic nature of the market. It's impossible to enforce parity, but also maintain a feature rich environment.

Microsoft refusing to utilize the sense controllers or VR or whatever in the future because their console doesn't have it despite all other publishers utilizing those features on PS6, would mean consumers aren't getting the best experience and you can't force them to utilize these features if all that is promised is parity. The offer itself in inadequate and in itself difficult to enforce.

What is the CMA going to do enlist Digital Foundry to analyze performance on the game, enlist reviewers to see if there is a consensus on features and content? That doesn't even cover subscription available and cost...

 

[FBeeEye]

Imagine defending

Bobby Kotick

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. Bobby Kotick can be both a piece of crap and right.

 

[Banjo64]

as more than COD, guess this will test their metal, so to speak

They have said that but it's hard to deny that much of the value, which set the cost of the acquisition, is in CoD. What would they be left with without CoD for Game Pass?

For PC only; Warcraft and StarCraft

For both console and PC; Diablo, Overwatch, Crash, Spyro & Tony Hawks

No offence, but it's hardly a killer line up in context of the overall price. They'd have to go through at $70b and then sell of CoD and it's studios, what would they realistically get for that? $30b? I don't know. If so, are King and those IPs worth $40b?

In my opinion Microsoft's silence is because they are probably contemplating killing this stone dead.

 

[jm89]

I still think CMA will rollback until April and will let the deal goes on.

If it was not the case MS and ABK would not be so confident.

Their confidence comes from not wanting the stock price to plummet. Gotta put on a brave face or folks will panic.

Koticks outburst doesn't really show confidence.

 

[Banjo64]

GHG it seems Bo_Hazem is going to feel qatari soon. He will be another oil fan, once qatari buys ManU.
Its very hard to compete with chelsea and Man city money. Now we have to compete with ManU and Newcaste oil money.

Stop yapping brother.

 

[demigod]

The problem you guys are making is it's not the definition of parity to the regulators but from Microsoft.

The regulators will ultimately have a problem with any guarantees of parity because of the dynamic nature of the market. It's impossible to enforce parity, but also maintain a feature rich environment.

Microsoft refusing to utilize the sense controllers or VR or whatever in the future because their console doesn't have it despite all other publishers utilizing those features on PS6, would mean consumers aren't getting the best experience and you can't force them to utilize these features if all that is promised is parity. The offer itself in inadequate and in itself difficult to enforce.

What is the CMA going to do enlist Digital Foundry to analyze performance on the game, enlist reviewers to see if there is a consensus on features and content? That doesn't even cover subscription available and cost...

If that was the case then every 3rd party game would utilize the sense controllers, but they don't. Even Sony doesn't enforce it on those devs.

 

[phil_t98]

My feeling is....if you're a Microsoft fan. Why do you really care if it doesn't work out?

You're still getting Activision Blizzard on your system....just not potentially exclusively and not on GamePass

The only people that have any right to really have a vested interest are Playstation only gamers.

I think for the majority it's the gamepass thing


Nothing changes for me either way as I have both consoles but the thought of games on gamepass always a plus

 

[Hero of Spielberg]

They have said that but it's hard to deny that much of the value, which set the cost of the acquisition, is in CoD. What would they be left with without CoD for Game Pass?

For PC only; Warcraft and StarCraft

For both console and PC; Diablo, Overwatch, Crash, Spyro & Tony Hawks

No offence, but it's hardly a killer line up in context of the overall price. They'd have to go through at $70b and then sell of CoD and it's studios, what would they realistically get for that? $30b? I don't know. If so, are King and those IPs worth $40b?

In my opinion Microsoft's silence is because they are probably contemplating killing this stone dead.

I don't have any idea of the relative values of the IP's tbh! COD is definitely the largest, but I'd say there's still some good value in Blizzard as well as a bunch of dormant IPs with a bit of recognition that would make new content easier to develop.

If it is all just COD and MS bail I'd probably be a bit disappointed in their commitment to their strategy but tbh