Helghan
Member
I hope it doesn't and that all those games come to Game Pass day 1. More value for my money.
Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
Bo_Hazem
Banned
Microsoft Says It Doesn't Know When Call of Duty Launched
In a 37-page reply to the FTC's lawsuit over its acquisition of Activision Blizzard, Microsoft is claiming not to know much about Call of Duty
insider-gaming.com
The Tourmaline Gorilla
Banned
The problem with your and other's argument is, it's focused only on mobile. Just because something is a primary focus, or one of the priority motivations behind an action, doesn't mean the secondary reasons or other reasons that fall lower in priority don't have value or are unworthy of consideration.
If they were solely interested in mobile reach, yes, there are other moves that could be made. It's obvious that's not their sole intention, even if they claim it's a big (or perhaps the biggest) reason for the purchase. I'm not saying MS is being honest, nor am I saying they're lying. I'm saying two things can be true at the same time, and one thing isn't always mutually exclusive to another.
If I'm buying Disney, I won't sell Marvel to get it. Nor would I sell Star Wars to get it. CoD is a cash cow, and so is Candy Crush. If I were buying ABK, I wouldn't dream of selling CoD, Candy Crush or even War Craft. I'd consider selling lesser titles or maybe even some old, unused IP, sure. But certainly not those three. It'd be almost all or nothing. If the deal doesn't go through, that would be terrible for me, but it also leaves me with a lot of cash in the "war chest" to make other moves, going forward.
Last edited:
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
You'll note Microsoft didn't make the same offer they made to Nvidia to Nintendo or Sony...
StealthGoblin
Banned
Microsoft increasingly look like clowns throughout this. They keep flip flopping ok what are priorities, not knowing things and then suddenly do etc.
Digging their own graves at times.
Digging their own graves at times.
Drell
Member
I'm not surprised. It's the same company that thought it also got Donkey Kong when acquiring Rare...Microsoft Says It Doesn't Know When Call of Duty Launched
In a 37-page reply to the FTC's lawsuit over its acquisition of Activision Blizzard, Microsoft is claiming not to know much about Call of Duty
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Increasing access?
Fucking hell. Let's pretend Bethesda takeover didn't happen, and Starfield, Fallout and Elder Scrolls weren't permanently shut out from the largest current gen install base.
Why are they shutout? MS doesnt force you to buy an xbox and pay $70 a go to play their games. PC, cloud, now looks like streaming.
Sonygaf are always telling us about their gaming PC, time to dust it off and enjoy the Bethesda games like everyone else, via gamepass or purchase, what ever price point you prefer.
And unlike Sony's someday maybe approach to PC you wont have to wait, enjoy the games same time as everyone else. ACCESS BABY!!!
Last edited:
jm89
Member
It's all getting hidden under the pr fud, I think in the end they won't have moved the needle much atleast not with the CMA.
Drell
Member
You know someone can be against a trillion dollars monopolistic company without necessarly being a Sony fanboy, right?
POKEYCLYDE
Member
The Nvidia deal encompasses all Xbox first party games. This is to quell the CMA's concerns about Microsoft dominating this nascent market. The Nvidia deal is a step in that direction anyway, I doubt it will be sufficient to sway the CMA.
The Nintendo deal rightly only includes Call of Duty because that is all that matters to the CMA when it comes to consoles. Again, private deals won't be enough to sway the CMA.
However, making these deals available to whomever wants them for the next couple of years with Iron clad, easily enforceable contracts might sway the CMA. We'll have to wait a few months to find out though.
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
Completely different services.
Plus is equivalent to games with gold, whereas Sony doesn't have a competitor to game pass.
But if they did, I wouldn't see a reason why not. It's also more likely Microsoft would accept it, rather than sony offering it.
You do realise PS+ also has a games catalogue and cloud streaming right?
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
These games were already coming to PC, stop playing dumb because you have no defence to the shit MS has pulled.
So they have massively decreased access to these big historically multiplatform titles with their previous acquisition. It's coming back to bite them in the ass, as it should.
PendekarRajawali
Member
MS: Sign this. We'll give you 10 years of CoD.
Nintendo: Excuse us, what is CoD? We have Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Pokemon.
MS: We'll give you 10 billion dollars.
Nintendo: Signed.
The clear winner is Nintendo.
Nintendo: Excuse us, what is CoD? We have Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Pokemon.
MS: We'll give you 10 billion dollars.
Nintendo: Signed.
The clear winner is Nintendo.
GHound
Member
But that ruins the narrative! There's no way that can be true!
Thirty7ven
Banned
They just had an old man dancing the Macarena on stage at Brussels. CMA is done for.
Mibu no ookami
Demoted Member® Pro™
I think there is a clear differentiator though.
They offered Nvidia a lot of content because Nvidia is not a competitor right now and likely won't be even with the offer of the content.
They made nintendo a similar deal, but did not include their Xbox PC content, because they release would tie them into having essentially an Xbox replacement via Switch/Switch 2 for the next 10 years. Which would absolutely destroy their console sales.
I wonder if there is anything in the language explicitly prohibiting Geforce Now from utilizing PlayStation or Nintendo consoles... Cause if that happens Microsoft will have the largest own goal of the decade.
Silver Wattle
Gold Member
I dislike CoD, so I think they should let the deal go ahead.
Last edited:
John Wick
Member
Yeah no shit. Where do you think they were gonna get a return on Minecraft if they kept it Xbox and PC exclusive?
Ar¢tos
Member
You joke but since I tried Linux 10 years ago I never went back to the bloatware people call Windows.
Last year I bought a mini pc that came with windows 10 installed and that thing took nearly 5 min to boot and was slow as molasses (i needed to run windows once to download and make the Linux boot USB pen after my old pc died), after installing Linux (not even a lightweight distro, basic Linux Mint with Cinnamon) I even forget it's a mini pc with 4gb Ram, everything runs fast and fluid.
jm89
Member
What year is this? And Linux kinda won the war anyway, maybe not on the consumer front but for enterprise server side. We even have an entire subsystem for linux on windows courtesy of microsoft.
Last edited:
Rat Rage
Member
Well, Microsoft is desperate as all fuck. As the numbers showed, they ony have 20 % market share (worldwide probably even lower) compared to their main competitor Sony.
The Activision-Blizzard aqusition worth 68 billion dollars (an absurdly high amount of money) is Microsoft's Hail Mary move.
They know, if this aquisition doesn't go through, they are completely done. They will never be able to catch up to Sony or Nintendo, because they simply don't have enough exclusive IP's to do so.
The Activision-Blizzard aqusition worth 68 billion dollars (an absurdly high amount of money) is Microsoft's Hail Mary move.
They know, if this aquisition doesn't go through, they are completely done. They will never be able to catch up to Sony or Nintendo, because they simply don't have enough exclusive IP's to do so.
Last edited:
FriulHado
Member
ToadMan
Member
You're right.
It seems a lot of people think this is a deal between companies but its not - its a deal between MS and the regulators.
It doesn't matter if every game company agrees to this deal - the regulators are there to try and protect consumers from business practices that cause harm.
I'd suggest that the more corporations "support" the deal after reaching contractual arrangements with MS, the more likely those companies have deduced a way to get something from this that will harm consumers.
They're not agreeing with MS because they predict they'll lose out, and MS is clearly enhancing its position through acquisition from which consumers will ultimately pay the price.
I'd want the regulators to investigate and oppose more stridently in these cases if there is a risk of harm especially where more companies make side deals and then say "we're in!"
TheGodfather07
Member
Behind the PR, what they are actually saying is we have messed up so bad and are so far behind sony, that we need publishers to keep xbox around. Pure incompetence from Microsoft and the arrogance to think they can just use their wealth for an easy solution after years of failings while other companies actually have to work their asses off to be successful. So glad regulators are finally doing their jobs on super rich corporations like this.
Last edited:
Drell
Member
Some people, here, believe that MS offering "presents" to other companies in exchange for their acceptance of the deal is a sign that this deal is a good thing for consumers...
Thirty7ven
Banned
MS was definitely the loudest person in the room.
The Tourmaline Gorilla
Banned
The "right" thing? I mean, I'm all for the merger/acquisition going through, but MS is far from an ethical company. For companies, generally, the "right" thing is usually what's the most profitable or has a positive effect on their image or reputation. MS is doing whatever it deems necessary, just as Sony is doing, and Nintendo.
MS is the one at high stakes here, because this is a huge investment, and until the deal goes through, it remains as a gamble/bet.
jm89
Member
I needed a good chuckle this morning.
MistBreeze
Member
Opposing the deal is not about Microsoft, it is about monopoly
If Sony were to acquire EA or Ubi Soft every one should oppose this deal
If Sony were to acquire EA or Ubi Soft every one should oppose this deal
anothertech
Member
MS have the resources to actually compete.
They could have 3 AAAs per month release on a given year.
What they are doing is shark style trashy business fuckery.
Hope their pirate ship sinks to the depths in misery.
They could have 3 AAAs per month release on a given year.
What they are doing is shark style trashy business fuckery.
Hope their pirate ship sinks to the depths in misery.
IllegalLemon
Member
You know the CMA's stance my dude. The 10 year deal stuff was what pushed the CMA to oppose it, & instead offer MS one of three options as a remedy (divest Cod, divest Blizz/keep the rest, divest Acti/keep the rest) or the 2nd option (do not accept anything at all & we block the deal). Microsoft made it abundantly clear yesterday that Cod was what they were going after, not King like they mentioned some time ago. They're not willing to divest to get the deal done & thus, this leaves the CMA with option number 2(block the deal), since MS continues to insist. They brought this upon themselves & now they have to pay the price.
Last edited:
MisterXDTV
Member
No question about it
Bitmap Frogs
Mr. Community
They had what, 20 years to build their stable of estudios and exclusive IPs?
RoadHazard
Gold Member
It's about preventing huge corporations from buying out everyone else in the market and killing all competition, creating a monopoly. Monopolies are bad for consumers, they're bad for everyone except that specific company.
Last edited:
DForce
NaughtyDog Defense Force
That means you're going to disappear for some time if the deal doesn't go through, right?
Microsoft isn't making game pass for the gamers, they're trying to control the entire gaming market. lol
Rykan
Member
Eh no.
Here is what was actually said.
It was just one single (ignorant) executive who thought this while touring Rare's office.
IllegalLemon
Member
LordCBH
Member
They have a stable of fantastic IP's, they just lack competent leadership with a good vision who can use them.
Bonfires Down
Member
You all realize that if the deal doesn't go through Microsoft will buy publishers that you actually care about instead?
Tal Shiar Agent
Banned
Well, the deal is dead then. The CMA does not accept behavioral remedies.
PharaoTutAnchAmun
Member
Dont now yet but the game is not over yet...so game on...
Thirty7ven
Banned
Everyone is writing revenge fan fic these days.
Sanepar
Member
They are not. They just showed in 21 years been really incompent with studios and ip management. That is the biggest problem with them consolidating.
Changed strategy 4 times in 20 years. What they did until kinect was incredible in terms of games.
GHG
Member
Last edited:
Sanepar
Member
Well there is a chance of bribe here. So deal has a chance. Afterall is a bigtech and corruption is part of this business.i would 50-50 regulators change their minds. EU will approve I'm 100% sure about this. CMA will be an island isolated.
- Status