Support NeoGAF

[Cheezewizz]

Yeah i Sony fanboy who has a PC and Xbox Series X lol and not even a playstation. I would by sales people prefer what Sony delivers and yes Sony delivers high quality games for who enjoy sp games.

His point wasn't that Sony can't make quality games. It was that All they make these days are the same type of third person sp games with a sob story.

Microsoft has since 2017 a service they delivery all their games day one and didn't move 1% in their favor. So yes audience is major with Sony.

Not according to the available data. Even Ampere stated that Xbox has taken marketshare at Sony's expense last I saw. Aside from that, there's the fact that your still stuck in 2013 where consoles sold > everything else. That hasn't been the case for quite some time, and even if it was Sony would be getting it's ass handed to them by Nintendo. So when it comes to Console sales which Nintendo relies heavily on, Sony is getting spanked. And where sub services and user engagement is concerned which is what MS focuses on, Sony is getting spanked there as well.

Sony has found tons of success in between the two, where it's settled into relying on the one thing it's studios do best... making those sp games you love so much, along with remakes and remasters.

 

[Cheezewizz]

Where is the evidence for this?

In Sony's first party releases.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

In Sony's first party releases.

GoWR is the fastest selling Sony first party title of all time…

 

[Looking Cool Joker!]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/oth...-regulators-says-reuters/ar-AA188VKQ#comments

This is terrible news. It looks like the right people in the EU and US Government have been paid off for this deal to happen. Sony sucks too but Activision's quality of games isn't going to improve. Just look at Modern Warfare II's 2022 reboot.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/oth...-regulators-says-reuters/ar-AA188VKQ#comments

This is terrible news. It looks like the right people in the EU and US Government have been paid off for this deal to happen. Sony sucks too but Activision's quality of games isn't going to improve. Just look at Modern Warfare II's 2022 reboot.

The UK has anyways been the biggest hurdle for this deal, nothing is really new that I can glean from this article

 

[Looking Cool Joker!]

The UK has anyways been the biggest hurdle for this deal, nothing is really new that I can glean from this article

True and fair enough.

 

[Nubulax]

Spiderman aside, where Sony is at now isn't all that dissimilar to where Marvel movies were a few years ago. Marvel were absolutely wiping the floor with everybody. Nothing could touch whatever Marvel chose to release next. However we're now starting to see people tire of seeing the same formula done over and over again. Seeing its audience beginning to fatigue, Marvel is aware that changes need to be made. It's just that they seem to be unable to find a direction to pivot towards.

Sony's repeated formula of third person singleplayer action games is beginning to stagnate. While Sony had plenty of new ip last gen, that's not really the case these days. Even your list is comprised of sequels orspinoffs, and that's not even including the endless remakes and remasters of the same games over and over.

The biggest difference between them is that while Marvel seems stuck trying to decide their next move, Sony is not. Sony has apparently decided to pivot towards multiplayer GAAS titles going forward. And while you are obviously confident that their studios are capable of making those kinds of games going forward, many people are not. The last time Sony's studios attempted to compete in the multiplayer genre they had their asses handed to them. And that's when things were far easier, and they just had to compete against MS. Whereas today there is exponentially more competition in that space. So even in a segment where MS struggles to compete with franchises like Halo, (which absolutely wiped the floor with everything Sony could throw at it) you suddenly believe that Sony is about to "hit next level".

I'm a bit skeptical to say the least.

God of War with its 11 million sales so far seems pretty good along with Hogwarts and its third person singleplayer selling like crazy

 

[Varteras]

They were and specifically commented on that 10 year deal in the PF document already - 7.264 below. But if you read from page 143 onwards the CMA talk about all of this.

In summary, the CMA don't like these deals because over time the ability to enforce them diminishes.

Oh and they throw shade on MS's ability to deliver an equivalent experience on Switch here for good measure.

Bear in mind this document predates the MS response from last week.

People really need to read this until it sinks in. The CMA is not moved by 10-year deals because they don't find that an adequate timeframe to protect the market. That was and continues to be the maximum timeframe Microsoft has offered.

They don't view the offers Sony received at that point to hold any weight in their decision, as Sony hadn't agreed to anything. If you're still asking why Sony doesn't just accept CoD for 10 years, this should answer your question.

They also more or less do not have faith in Microsoft to accomplish their agreements, as with Nintendo. That even in a legally binding situation, they're not confident that Microsoft won't break the deal.

The only way this gets through the CMA without divestment is if it has a sudden change of heart.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/oth...-regulators-says-reuters/ar-AA188VKQ#comments

This is terrible news. It looks like the right people in the EU and US Government have been paid off for this deal to happen. Sony sucks too but Activision's quality of games isn't going to improve. Just look at Modern Warfare II's 2022 reboot.

The UK has anyways been the biggest hurdle for this deal, nothing is really new that I can glean from this article

True and fair enough.

Yeah, this is old news now, bud. It also really doesn't touch on the FTC, who are still maintaining that the deal be blocked. The EC was always looked at as the most likely of the three to be soft on the deal because Xbox is getting a good ol' prison Rogering in their market. The US and UK markets are a different story. The CMA has pretty much laid it out that they don't want to allow Microsoft the opportunity any time soon, if ever, to leverage CoD against competitors.

 

[Sanepar]

Spiderman aside, where Sony is at now isn't all that dissimilar to where Marvel movies were a few years ago. Marvel were absolutely wiping the floor with everybody. Nothing could touch whatever Marvel chose to release next. However we're now starting to see people tire of seeing the same formula done over and over again. Seeing its audience beginning to fatigue, Marvel is aware that changes need to be made. It's just that they seem to be unable to find a direction to pivot towards.

Sony's repeated formula of third person singleplayer action games is beginning to stagnate. While Sony had plenty of new ip last gen, that's not really the case these days. Even your list is comprised of sequels orspinoffs, and that's not even including the endless remakes and remasters of the same games over and over.

The biggest difference between them is that while Marvel seems stuck trying to decide their next move, Sony is not. Sony has apparently decided to pivot towards multiplayer GAAS titles going forward. And while you are obviously confident that their studios are capable of making those kinds of games going forward, many people are not. The last time Sony's studios attempted to compete in the multiplayer genre they had their asses handed to them. And that's when things were far easier, and they just had to compete against MS. Whereas today there is exponentially more competition in that space. So even in a segment where MS struggles to compete with franchises like Halo, (which absolutely wiped the floor with everything Sony could throw at it) you suddenly believe that Sony is about to "hit next level".

I'm a bit skeptical to say the least.

Yeap we can see that with ps5 sales and all their games sales.

Xbox fanboys live in a parallel reality.

What was the console that sold 13% less last quarter on it 2nd year?

 

[BeardGawd]

Didn't the EU say they were against the deal at first?

 

[RickMasters]

It's just kind of weird since you also wrote that they need to do a lot more work - but it's not clear what more you think they can be doing that they're not already doing.

Consistency...but thats something that is only proven over time. putting their whole hit and miss past aside for a moment, from here at this moment in time. All they can do is deliver at this point. and even that takes time. Lets just hope they have learned lessons from the past, should GP start to become the success they want it to be. There has always been the danger complacency and misreading of their customers wants, when it comes to xbox.

 

[Varteras]

Didn't the EU say they were against the deal at first?

The EC, CMA, and FTC all have objections to the deal. The difference is in the intensity. They all either want concessions of some type or to just outright block it.

 

[drganon]

Hey, just because I can form a competent argument doesn't mean you have to hate. Just accept that we're better at different things. I'm sure you're better at all sorts of things than me. Of course this isn't a cuck forum so it would be off topic unfortunately but I wouldn't hate on you for it. Be you little guy. Own it.

It must be painful to live in that delusional world of yours.

 

[freefornow]

All these "digs" at one another over 2 corporations that wouldnt even piss on you if you were on fire.

Memes are more effective.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Provide proof the CMA said 10 years wasn't enough.

We haven't even heard CMA's response to MS's remedies yet. That's what we are waiting on.

There is a small difference there.

The CMA has already said that behavioral remedies are not applicable in this case, but Microsoft is free to convince the CMA that behavioral remedies are indeed sufficient. If/When the CMA is convinced, they will evaluate Microsoft's suggested behavioral remedies and see if they get the same effects as divestment, without needing to divest.

The problem with MS is that they had already offered the 10-year deals and submitted nothing new in the behavioral remedy response. It's essentially the same thing (10-year deals) that does not have the same effect as divestment. The CMA has already commented on these 10-year contractual agreements. So its comments are likely to be the same when they respond on MS's suggested behavioral remedies because those are -- surprise -- the same 10-year contractual agreements (unsigned) that the CMA earlier commented on.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Hey, just because I can form a competent argument doesn't mean you have to hate. Just accept that we're better at different things. I'm sure you're better at all sorts of things than me. Of course this isn't a cuck forum so it would be off topic unfortunately but I wouldn't hate on you for it. Be you little guy. Own it.

Man, what the fuck?! Gross.

 

[BeardGawd]

There is a small difference there.

The CMA has already said that behavioral remedies are not applicable in this case, but Microsoft is free to convince the CMA that behavioral remedies are indeed sufficient. If/When the CMA is convinced, they will evaluate Microsoft's suggested behavioral remedies and see if they get the same effects as divestment, without needing to divest.

The problem with MS is that they had already offered the 10-year deals and submitted nothing new in the behavioral remedy response. It's essentially the same thing (10-year deals) that does not have the same effect as divestment. The CMA has already commented on these 10-year contractual agreements. So its comments are likely to be the same when they respond on MS's suggested behavioral remedies because those are -- surprise -- the same 10-year contractual agreements (unsigned) that the CMA earlier commented on.

The CMA has not commented on 10 year deals yet. it's not just the Sony deal by itself. It's also in combination with the Nintendo, Steam, and Nvidia deals. Everyone else is happy but Sony at this point. As long as the EU takes on monitoring duties I think the CMA aill agree it's enough. They could have completely closed behavioral at Phase 1 but they left the door open.

 

[poppabk]

But what if that platform is the only option?

Then CoD is dead in the water.

 

[Snowdonhoffen]

With the Zenimax/Bethesda deal they added a large number of quality IPs to their portfolio. Why would I not think MS has capable studios? They have a fantastic stable of studios.

Microsoft themselves probably don't believe they have capable studios, cause they literally said they needed more studios and IPs to be able to compete in the gaming industry, lol. But yeah, they ALREADY have everything they will ever need to make some big and awesome games.

 

[Heisenberg007]

The CMA has not commented on 10 year deals yet. it's not just the Sony deal by itself. It's also in combination with the Nintendo, Steam, and Nvidia deals. Everyone else is happy but Sony at this point. As long as the EU takes on monitoring duties I think the CMA aill agree it's enough. They could have completely closed behavioral at Phase 1 but they left the door open.

You didn't understand what I wrote above and the differences between making promises and submitting those promises formally as part of the suggested behavioral remedies.

Anyway, if they had closed it without officially leaving the door open for hearing Microsoft, Microsoft could have sued the CMA for improper procedures. The CMA has shut that possibility down.

Second, if the CMA has not commented on Microsoft's deals, what is this screenshot I shared? What is the CMA saying here?

 

[RCU005]

I just hope Jim knows he's in for a huge uphill battle, if this deal doesn't go through

That's completely nonsense. This is a business not some personal attack based on someone's ego. Their business will continue as usual.

In fact, if the deal doesn't go through, Microsoft is the one who is going to be in an uphill battle. They have the least marketshare, completely lost in Japan, and have a mismanagement of studios.

Sony has done an incredible job since the PS4. Even though I personally hate that they continue to do cross-gen games, the majority of the people don't care and are really happy with PlayStation's offering.

 

[quest]

Microsoft themselves probably don't believe they have capable studios, cause they literally said they needed more studios and IPs to be able to compete in the gaming industry, lol. But yeah, they ALREADY have everything they will ever need to make some big and awesome games.

Sony is acquiring studios so they don't believe in what they have. They still money hat major studio games is that because they don't trust thier studios. See how that works? Microsoft needs around 30-35 studios so they can get to the point of 1 release a quarter. Plus leave a few in reserve for delays. A few of the current studios won't release many games but support thier gaas like elder scrolls on line and minecraft.

 

[bender]

Hey, just because I can form a competent argument doesn't mean you have to hate. Just accept that we're better at different things. I'm sure you're better at all sorts of things than me. Of course this isn't a cuck forum so it would be off topic unfortunately but I wouldn't hate on you for it. Be you little guy. Own it.

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Microsoft needs around 30-35 studios so they can get to the point of 1 release a quarter

and even that is highly unlikely.

 

[BeardGawd]

You didn't understand what I wrote above and the differences between making promises and submitting those promises formally as part of the suggested behavioral remedies.

Anyway, if they had closed it without officially leaving the door open for hearing Microsoft, Microsoft could have sued the CMA for improper procedures. The CMA has shut that possibility down.

Second, if the CMA has not commented on Microsoft's deals, what is this screenshot I shared? What is the CMA saying here?

I would need to see the full page for context. They have not made a decision on 10 years because Sony has not signed it.. Now that we know Jim has no intentions of ever signing any agreenent the CMA will need to take that into consideration.

 

[IFireflyl]

I would need to see the full page for context.

Then go read the document. Don't argue with others over what has been said if you're ignorant to what has been said.

They have not made a decision on 10 years because Sony has not signed it..

That's not how the regulatory bodies work. They don't need Sony to sign something to come to an agreement with Microsoft/Activision.

 

[bitbydeath]

Was this posted?

Microsoft urges CMA to back down from divestment ultimatum in Activision Blizzard deal

Microsoft urges CMA to back down from divestment ultimatum in Activision Blizzard deal

Microsoft has argued that behavioural remedies would preserve the “substantial” benefits arising from its $68.7 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard, as the company pushes back against the UK antitrust enforcer’s provisional Phase II findings.

globalcompetitionreview.com

No response yet given, but I gather it's for CMA to further consider when putting out their final evaluation in April.

 

[IFireflyl]

Was this posted?

http://[URL][URL]https://globalcomp...estment-ultimatum-in-activision-blizzard-deal

[/URL][/URL]

No response yet given, but I gather it's for CMA to further consider when putting out their final evaluation in April.

Is paywall. Am sad. Much cry.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Was this posted?

Microsoft urges CMA to back down from divestment ultimatum in Activision Blizzard deal

Microsoft has argued that behavioural remedies would preserve the “substantial” benefits arising from its $68.7 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard, as the company pushes back against the UK antitrust enforcer’s provisional Phase II findings.

globalcompetitionreview.com

No response yet given, but I gather it's for CMA to further consider when putting out their final evaluation in April.

This is from the document that Microsoft submitted a few days ago (behavioral remedies response). The headline implies that Microsoft leadership "said" something to the CMA executives, which isn't the case.

 

[bitbydeath]

This is from the document that Microsoft submitted a few days ago (behavioral remedies response). The headline implies that Microsoft leadership "said" something to the CMA executives, which isn't the case.

Thought it may have been from the meeting they had last week.

 

[BeardGawd]

Then go read the document. Don't argue with others over what has been said if you're ignorant to what has been said.



That's not how the regulatory bodies work. They don't need Sony to sign something to come to an agreement with Microsoft/Activision.

What are you talking abojt? Someone else said they commented on the 10 year deal. I asked for proof and I still haven't seen anything.

I know they don't need Sony to sign. The CMA is right now determining if it's enough. We have not gotten any word back if the remedies are enough yet.

 

[Edmund]

I find it very odd that Hoeg isn't a banned source in Era as confirmed by a mod about 10 minutes ago. I thought they'd ban him outright but I guess not since he's in favour of the deal.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

I find it very odd that Hoeg isn't a banned source in Era as confirmed by a mod about 10 minutes ago. I thought they'd ban him outright but I guess not since he's in favour of the deal.

some people will be angry at that decision. either way. is a win-win.

 

[Heisenberg007]

What are you talking abojt? Someone else said they commented on the 10 year deal. I asked for proof and I still haven't seen anything.

I know they don't need Sony to sign. The CMA is right now determining if it's enough. We have not gotten any word back if the remedies are enough yet.

I have shared it, by the way. Here is another.

If you want more information, you will have to do the legwork and read the document and the preceding and following paragraphs for full context.

 

[BeardGawd]

I have shared it, by the way. Here is another.

If you want more information, you will have to do the legwork and read the document and the preceding and following paragraphs for full context.

You won't post the full thing because they clearly state they aren't considering the 10 year deal because it hasn't been signed by Sony.

Now that we know Sony is refusing to sign anything we are awaiting for the CMA's final decision.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

You won't post the full thing because they clearly state they aren't considering the 10 year deal because it hasn't been signed by Sony.

Now that we know Sony is refusing to sign anything we are awaiting for the CMA's final decision.

The CMA has stated they don't believe behavioral remedies are possible to address their concerns

Whether that specific 10 year deal was included in their analysis is moot; certainly a licensing agreement was already considered when making such a statement

 

[Iced Arcade]

I find it very odd that Hoeg isn't a banned source in Era as confirmed by a mod about 10 minutes ago. I thought they'd ban him outright but I guess not since he's in favour of the deal.

Why we worrying about someone statue on another forum lol

 

[bitbydeath]

What are you talking abojt? Someone else said they commented on the 10 year deal. I asked for proof and I still haven't seen anything.

I know they don't need Sony to sign. The CMA is right now determining if it's enough. We have not gotten any word back if the remedies are enough yet.

CMA are only accepting divestment.
They've left the door open for a behavioural remedy that also funnily enough leads to divestment. (This stuff should be in the OP)

At this stage, the CMA has identified the following possible structural remedies:
(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.

Behavioural remedies are designed to address an SLC and/or its adverse
effects by regulating the ongoing conduct of parties following a merger.

The SLCs we have provisionally found do not relate to the entirety of Activision Blizzard, Inc's business. Therefore, in principle, remedying these SLCs may be achieved by divesting a part of Activision Blizzard, Inc's activities. Partial divestiture would involve splitting up Activision Blizzard, Inc's business and divesting a package of assets relating to the provisional SLCs.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/63e376bdd3bf7f173ad1cee4/Notice_of_possible_remedies_2.0.pdf

 

[feynoob]

 

[TheGodfather07]

That's completely nonsense. This is a business not some personal attack based on someone's ego. Their business will continue as usual.

In fact, if the deal doesn't go through, Microsoft is the one who is going to be in an uphill battle. They have the least marketshare, completely lost in Japan, and have a mismanagement of studios.

Sony has done an incredible job since the PS4. Even though I personally hate that they continue to do cross-gen games, the majority of the people don't care and are really happy with PlayStation's offering.

In what world is Activision staying 3rd party bad for sony? That's THE only good outcome for sony from all of this and exactly what they want. They would much rather be on bad terms with Activision rather than Microsoft owning them. Even with 10 year contracts. Sony know what we all do. Microsoft owning Activision means they lose all those ip eventually. 10 years is nothing. Businesses think long term.

 

[Varteras]

 

[Heisenberg007]

You won't post the full thing because they clearly state they aren't considering the 10 year deal because it hasn't been signed by Sony.

Now that we know Sony is refusing to sign anything we are awaiting for the CMA's final decision.

You want me to post images of the full 277-page document?

I've shown you exactly where the CMA says that "Microsoft separate offers to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation post-merger" does not matter because it does not change their ability to foreclose PS.

Anyway, here is the full thing. https://assets.publishing.service.g...ctivision_-_Provisional_Findings_Report_3.pdf Have fun with it.

 

[BeardGawd]

CMA are only accepting divestment.
They've left the door open for a behavioural remedy that also funnily enough leads to divestment. (This stuff should be in the OP)

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/63e376bdd3bf7f173ad1cee4/Notice_of_possible_remedies_2.0.pdf

From the very link you posted.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Didn't the EU say they were against the deal at first?

Without concessions? They pretty much all are except for the FTC that wants to block it regardless. The EC and CMA are allowing the deal to go through with concessions.

 

[bitbydeath]

From the very link you posted.

None of that goes against what I said.

 

[MasterCornholio]

You want me to post images of the full 277-page document?

Let's add a few more pages to this thread.

 

[IFireflyl]

You won't post the full thing because they clearly state they aren't considering the 10 year deal because it hasn't been signed by Sony.

Now that we know Sony is refusing to sign anything we are awaiting for the CMA's final decision.

You are one of the most ignorant people in this thread when it comes to this acquisition. If you're going to talk about the acquisition you should actually read up on it. Not from your favorite fanboy, but with the actual SEC and regulatory documents.

Instead of doing this, you make ridiculous arguments that people won't link full documents (which have been linked dozens of times in this thread), or you claim that you don't know the context of someone's post (when they replied to you to address something you said) because you haven't read the documents yourself. Learn how to get information on your own. If someone says something that is incorrect, refute it with evidence instead of plugging your ears like a child and screaming, "I don't believe you!"

 

[DForce]

You won't post the full thing because they clearly state they aren't considering the 10 year deal because it hasn't been signed by Sony.

Now that we know Sony is refusing to sign anything we are awaiting for the CMA's final decision.

Sony wouldn't have to sign if it they believe the 10-year deal was sufficient enough. lol

 

[Helghan]

People have just realized MS's lie they've been peddling since Phil has taken the helm, which is "all games on as many platforms as possible". Which we've seen how that panned out.

What lie? All their games release day 1 on PC, Sony blocks Game Pass from PlayStation.

 

[Topher]

I find it very odd that Hoeg isn't a banned source in Era as confirmed by a mod about 10 minutes ago. I thought they'd ban him outright but I guess not since he's in favour of the deal.

Why would era ban Hoeg?

Edit: Disregard. Found it on era. Typical era thought police bullshit.

What lie? All their games release day 1 on PC, Sony blocks Game Pass from PlayStation.

Of course they do but that doesn't prevent any game from being on PS. Xbox games are on Steam while Game Pass is not. However, I'm not saying that means MS is lying about anything.