Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)

Do you believe the deal will be approved?

  • Yes, will be approved without changes.

    Votes: 221 24.9%

  • Yes, will be approved but with structural changes to ABK.

    Votes: 102 11.5%

  • Yes, will be approved but only with behavioral concessions.

    Votes: 262 29.6%

  • No, will not be approved.

    Votes: 301 34.0%
  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
feynoob said:
As for you Xbox/gamepass gamers, gz on this feast if this deal gets approved.
JLsKKyf.jpg
Click to expand...

The person who created it wasn't going for accuracy. Was it klobrille?

Overwatch has shut down and been delisted from the store. Overwatch 2 is f2p so you don't need GP. You can't play Guitar Hero Live on an xbox series console because the game isn't supported AFAIK, there is also no PC version at all so unless they make a port that's unlikely to be +PC. Licensed stuff like Spiderman, TMNT amd Transformers might be tricky to bring too but at least possible.
 
Dick Jones said:
Are you seriously asking me not to use a recent example of bad faith but look at one game (that has a rumour of a multiplatform clause) from years ago?
Click to expand...

There's no multiplatform clause for Minecraft. If it existed, it would have been announced ages ago, most likely by Notch.
Regulators certainly weren't an obstacle.

The 'recent example of bad faith' you cite is really in your own imagination. Because they did exactly what they promised - games were kept on PlayStation and Nintendo stores, updates to existing games were released multiplatform (eg Elder Scrolls online, Fallout 76 DLC) and even some new titles came to competing devices on a case-by-case basis eg Quake Remastered.
 
Last edited:
Three said:
The person who created it wasn't going for accuracy. Was it klobrille?

Overwatch has shut down and been delisted from the store. Overwatch 2 is f2p so you don't need GP. You can't play Guitar Hero Live on an xbox series console because the game isn't supported AFAIK, there is also no PC version at all so unless they make a port that's unlikely to be +PC. Licensed stuff like Spiderman, TMNT amd Transformers might be tricky to bring too but at least possible.
Click to expand...
I think it was during the purchase announcement.

MS have a lot of work to make some of those games work on Xbox like you said.
 
Drell said:
Well FTC and EC could deny US and Europe for Sony respectivly if they wanted to but after letting a buyout as big as activison pass, it would be a dick move to not let Sony buy Japanese studios.
Click to expand...

try to block a foreign company would be the most serious thing in this whole "acquisition campaign".

beyond the definitions of the market, of who is the leader or not, I find it quite complicated to try to hinder mergers that will be much smaller than abk/microsoft
 
Ozriel said:
There's no multiplatform clause for Minecraft. If it existed, it would have been announced ages ago, most likely by Notch.
Regulators certainly weren't an obstacle.

The 'recent example of bad faith' you cite is really in your own imagination. Because they did exactly what they promised - games were kept on PlayStation and Nintendo stores, updates to existing games were released multiplatform (eg Elder Scrolls online, Fallout 76 DLC) and even some new titles came to competing devices on a case-by-case basis eg Quake Remastered.
Click to expand...
So it was on bad faith and you have backed up my argument. I'm glad we agree on something. Also COD will remain forever on PS based on your Minecraft statement. Jesus, we have sorted the COD issue quickly.
 
Some people are saying Square Enix isn't a likely Sony acquisition. One of the main reasons behind this opinion is that Sony already get Square's flagship IP exclusive to their console.

But Sony has centered an exclusivity strategy around Square Enix flagship IP like Final Fantasy and Dragonquest as a selling point for their consoles. Playstation is the place to be for JRPGs. As Microsoft closes the distance in marketshare, Square is less likely to accept exclusivity contracts, these contracts are going to become much more expensive and much less favorable to Sony (with shorter exclusivity windows, console only exclusivity, etc.)

If Sony wants to secure their Square Enix relationship and solidify Playstation as the place for JRPGs, Square is a great acquisition.

Sony also knows the success in playing into fan desires. There are plenty of Square Enix IP fans are crying out for that SE is ignoring. I feel like acquiring Square Enix would be a defensive acquisition that maintains/strengthens their current strategy.

Selfishly I'd love Square Enix under Sony. Get away from NFTs and bring back great IP like Parasite Eve and the Chrono series.
 
Zephyrus0 said:
What exactly did you think the response to microsoft's move was going to be for you to be laughing?
This was always the next step, which is why a lot of us didn't want for microsoft to get this deal.

Personally I hope sony gets Rockstar games. I'd much rather sony got capcom and square enix since aside from sony, they're the two with the most games that I play, but I want Rockstar so Sony twists the knife on microsoft's neck asap. The sooner this cancerous company is out of videogame industry, the better we will all be.
Click to expand...
"twist the knife"
"Cancerous"
FFS pal, for your own mental benefit, step away and get some fresh air. It's not worth getting this worked up over video games.
 
Dick Jones said:
So it was on bad faith and you have backed up my argument. I'm glad we agree on something. Also COD will remain forever on PS based on your Minecraft statement. Jesus, we have sorted the COD issue quickly.
Click to expand...

Lol, if that's what you can parse from what I said, I think you have bigger challenges than whether or not COD remains multiplatform.

Zephyrus0 said:
Personally I hope sony gets Rockstar games. I'd much rather sony got capcom and square enix since aside from sony, they're the two with the most games that I play, but I want Rockstar so Sony twists the knife on microsoft's neck asap. The sooner this cancerous company is out of videogame industry, the better we will all be.
Click to expand...

Family Feud Lol GIF by Steve Harvey
 
This acquisition nonsense is funny as hell 🤣🤣.

At least it's much better than the discussion we were having before this news.

I remember Nintendo/market share/divestment/etc talk and clock round talks.
 
Last edited:
POKEYCLYDE said:
Some people are saying Square Enix isn't a likely Sony acquisition. One of the main reasons behind this opinion is that Sony already get Square's flagship IP exclusive to their console.

But Sony has centered an exclusivity strategy around Square Enix flagship IP like Final Fantasy and Dragonquest as a selling point for their consoles. Playstation is the place to be for JRPGs. As Microsoft closes the distance in marketshare, Square is less likely to accept exclusivity contracts, these contracts are going to become much more expensive and much less favorable to Sony (with shorter exclusivity windows, console only exclusivity, etc.)

If Sony wants to secure their Square Enix relationship and solidify Playstation as the place for JRPGs, Square is a great acquisition.

Sony also knows the success in playing into fan desires. There are plenty of Square Enix IP fans are crying out for that SE is ignoring. I feel like acquiring Square Enix would be a defensive acquisition that maintains/strengthens their current strategy.

Selfishly I'd love Square Enix under Sony. Get away from NFTs and bring back great IP like Parasite Eve and the Chrono series.
Click to expand...
I do not believe Sony needs to overreact to this acquisition, nor do I think they will. However, SE would be a good fit for Sony and it would be huge loss for them if they do not find a way to secure it.
 
feynoob said:
This acquisition nonsense is funny as hell 🤣🤣.

At least it's much better than the discussion we were having before this news.
Click to expand...
I swear to god we are long overdue a big positive gaming thread, I can't wait for the Switch 2 announcement trailer so we can get a thread going. Seeing some new hardware, speculating on the specs, seeing some fresh games. This thread has been funny but contentious throughout.
 
Topher said:
Social leaders like colt eastwood? lol......that really just sounds like they want folks to advertise Xbox for free. Not sure that is how to grow a global brand though.
Click to expand...

Xbox: "we plan to invest more in localization and build more awareness through community and social leaders in these other markets"


How did you get 'ColtEastwood' from that?

Localization and country specific influencers doesn't help to build a global brand?
 
DryvBy said:
Has anyone answered this? Maybe I'm just very stupid but how does buying a publisher create more competition when we know good and well that they're going to push 99% of their products as exclusive?
Click to expand...
The logic behind it is sound. When one competitor's offering improves, the other competitor has to respond.

When Xbox 360 was killing it, Sony invested in it's first party offerings, creating some of the best games in the industry. When the PS4 was killing it, Microsoft created Gamepass and dedicated releasing their first party games on that sub service day and date, a great value for customers.

As Microsoft's gaming acquisitions improve their marketshare, or just the perception that these acquisitions are a great offering for consumers, Sony will have to respond somehow. That is competition.
 
Flutta said:
So basically "rules" don't apply to the elite of the elite. They have politicians and regulators in their pockets. What we saw during this whole time was just some charade on display and everyone believed the rules apply to any company. Well at least we got entertained in the process 🤣
Click to expand...
Ahhh yes, the CMA was credible and doing their due diligence, was very knowledgeable of the games industry and they were so well researched when they were leaning toward divestment/prohibition.

Now that they corrected a mathematical error that their whole console SLC was relying on and state as much, they're in Microsoft's pockets! It's all rigged!
 
Ozriel said:
Xbox: "we plan to invest more in localization and build more awareness through community and social leaders in these other markets"


How did you get 'ColtEastwood' from that?

Localization and country specific influencers doesn't help to build a global brand?
Click to expand...

The western equivalent "social leaders" they associate themselves with are the likes of Colt and his ilk
 
Last edited:
Ozriel said:
Lol, if that's what you can parse from what I said, I think you have bigger challenges than whether or not COD remains multiplatform.
Click to expand...
You proved my point. It clashes with what they told regulators. Read what MS claimed to the EC re Bethesda. It doesn't match up... clearly.

Ass of Can Whooping said:
The western equivalent "social leaders" they associate themselves with are the likes of Colt
Click to expand...
Aaron Greenberg tweeting with the likes of TimDogggggxxxxx and Cunt Eastwood shows how toxic their marketing is.
 
Ozriel said:
Colt Eastwood is American. They aren't talking about the likes of him in that context.

A better example would be the Japanese vTubers they're using to promote Xbox Gamepass in Japan.

https://gamerant.com/xbox-vtuber-shishiro-botan-himemori-luna-game-pass-promote/

They're also doing something similar in South Korea, Brazil etc.
Click to expand...

I'm aware he's american. Hence why I said the western equivalent. Those are the type of people they use to promote the brand in their stronger territories. That's why Topher refered to him
 
POKEYCLYDE said:
The logic behind it is sound. When one competitor's offering improves, the other competitor has to respond.

When Xbox 360 was killing it, Sony invested in it's first party offerings, creating some of the best games in the industry. When the PS4 was killing it, Microsoft created Gamepass and dedicated releasing their first party games on that sub service day and date, a great value for customers.

As Microsoft's gaming acquisitions improve their marketshare, or just the perception that these acquisitions are a great offering for consumers, Sony will have to respond somehow. That is competition.
Click to expand...

Funny, when Xbox 360 was killing it, Sony's reply was to improve what they have. When MS is losing, they buy up the products to keep them off other platforms. And when that still doesn't help, they do it again. They're response is never improve their own product, it's to moneyhat the competition out of the market. If you think this is a good thing, you're proving that you're just a fanboy because no way someone like this thinks this is good if every company starts buying up everything.

Sony's reply could be to start a new set of IPs which is a lot more expensive than just buying up properties from their competitors as well. So pretend for a minute Sony wants to stay dominating, you're going to pretend if they bought say Rockstar and Square that this is a good thing? GTFO with that. But that's where they should go because if not, MS will just buy the companies when they stay in 3rd place. Because they still haven't addressed that with their current studios, they could be competitive but they have idiots worshipping Phil Spencer, the constipated idiot ruining things.

What you described as "competition" can become anticompetitive when they're acquiring too many properties. This goes for anyone. This works if they didn't have more studios than everyone else but guess what: they already do.
 
POKEYCLYDE said:
The logic behind it is sound. When one competitor's offering improves, the other competitor has to respond.

When Xbox 360 was killing it, Sony invested in it's first party offerings, creating some of the best games in the industry. When the PS4 was killing it, Microsoft created Gamepass and dedicated releasing their first party games on that sub service day and date, a great value for customers.

As Microsoft's gaming acquisitions improve their marketshare, or just the perception that these acquisitions are a great offering for consumers, Sony will have to respond somehow. That is competition.
Click to expand...
On the contrary. Anti-competitive acquisitions cannot be justified by this.

Sony has been leading the charge in terms of games since at least 2013. Has Microsoft offerings improved in that period? No.

So why are we assuming that Microsoft is doing a favor to Sony and PS gamers by acquiring publishers and giving Sony a kick in the ass so Sony can improve its offerings?

Acquisitions and consolidations only hurt competitors, remove games, minimize choices for gamers, and in some cases like these, minimize the competitors' ability to invest in their studios and games.
 
Zephyrus0 said:
Personally I hope sony gets Rockstar games. I'd much rather sony got capcom and square enix since aside from sony, they're the two with the most games that I play, but I want Rockstar so Sony twists the knife on microsoft's neck asap. The sooner this cancerous company is out of videogame industry, the better we will all be.
Click to expand...
OK, so you want Sony out of the industry, got it. I wouldn't go that far, but Sony should not be allowed to buy American companies until MS is allowed to buy Japanese companies.
 
Last edited:
Ozriel said:
Not this argument again. MS certainly didn't take away any existing games from PlayStation. Every ongoing game still got multiplatform post launch support eg Doom Eternal and Elder Scrolls Online.



Minecraft is already proof enough. Minecraft Dungeons is on PS+ this month and Minecraft Legends releases soon.
None of this based on contractual agreements.
Click to expand...
why are you adding new words? when did they say they didn't have an incentive to "remove existing" games. this is you changing what they said.
 
Last edited:
Goalus said:
OK, so you want Sony out of the industry, got it. I wouldn't go that far, but Sony should not be allowed to buy American companies until MS is allowed to buy Japanese companies.
Click to expand...
I don't think tit for tat is how most major govs operate luckily, but didn't Microsoft just acquire Tango Gameworks last year?
 
Heisenberg007 said:
On the contrary. Anti-competitive acquisitions cannot be justified by this.

Sony has been leading the charge in terms of games since at least 2013. Has Microsoft offerings improved in that period? No.

So why are we assuming that Microsoft is doing a favor to Sony and PS gamers by acquiring publishers and giving Sony a kick in the ass so Sony can improve its offerings?

Acquisitions and consolidations only hurt competitors, remove games, minimize choices for gamers, and in some cases like these, minimize the competitors' ability to invest in their studios and games.
Click to expand...
Naughty Dog - acquisition
Insomnia - acquisition
Guerrilla Games - acquisition
Nixxes - acquisition
Bluepoint - acquisition
 
Last edited:
Iced Arcade said:
I think a lot of people are also forgetting that Activision was looking to be sold. wasn't the big bad wolf MS popping in to snatch them up.
Click to expand...
This has been re-established nearly every day on this thread. Everyone knows it's not a hostile takeover. No one is forgetting Activision we're seeking a buy out. But the whims of corporations aren't everything.
 
COD is nice and I like it but I wouldn't sub to GP for it, now that the acquisition seems like is gonna happen, I hope MS invests in reviving and mantaining some of these ips:

Guitar hero
Crash
THPS
Gun (not happening)
True Crime (not happening)

With the amount of studios and IPs they would own they should be able to revive some from the graveyard, the one thing I don't like is they don't care about VR but oh well.
 
Three said:
The person who created it wasn't going for accuracy. Was it klobrille?

Overwatch has shut down and been delisted from the store. Overwatch 2 is f2p so you don't need GP. You can't play Guitar Hero Live on an xbox series console because the game isn't supported AFAIK, there is also no PC version at all so unless they make a port that's unlikely to be +PC. Licensed stuff like Spiderman, TMNT amd Transformers might be tricky to bring too but at least possible.
Click to expand...
Deadpool has also been delisted for a long time.
 
POKEYCLYDE said:
Some people are saying Square Enix isn't a likely Sony acquisition. One of the main reasons behind this opinion is that Sony already get Square's flagship IP exclusive to their console.

But Sony has centered an exclusivity strategy around Square Enix flagship IP like Final Fantasy and Dragonquest as a selling point for their consoles. Playstation is the place to be for JRPGs. As Microsoft closes the distance in marketshare, Square is less likely to accept exclusivity contracts, these contracts are going to become much more expensive and much less favorable to Sony (with shorter exclusivity windows, console only exclusivity, etc.)

If Sony wants to secure their Square Enix relationship and solidify Playstation as the place for JRPGs, Square is a great acquisition.

Sony also knows the success in playing into fan desires. There are plenty of Square Enix IP fans are crying out for that SE is ignoring. I feel like acquiring Square Enix would be a defensive acquisition that maintains/strengthens their current strategy.

Selfishly I'd love Square Enix under Sony. Get away from NFTs and bring back great IP like Parasite Eve and the Chrono series.
Click to expand...

I have no idea how you could argue PS is the home of JRPGs when Switch exists.

Switch: Xenoblade series, Fire Emblem series, Bravely Default series, Dragon Quest, SMT, Triangle Strategy, etc

PS: 2 FF entries that are basically character action games with nostalgia bait FF trappings + multiplats
 
Thirty7ven said:
Divest what?

Their football game doesn't have the FIFA license anymore, and Madden/F1 can keep being multiplatform. Football game too of course, but with the option to remove if MS removes COD.

Am I missing something here where it's ok for COD to keep being multiplatform but somehow EA sports would have to be divested?

If the games keep being multiplatform then it's ok right? That's what everyone is saying about ABK including regulators. So you buy revenue, like MS is doing with ABK.
Click to expand...

The post of mine that you quoted originally was about exclusives. For exclusives, I don't think EA would be a great deal for anyone to pick up. It's just a personal opinion of mine, LOL.

But, what you said is true, if you are just looking to make a straight investment that is true. MS and Sony's MO is typically different though, because MS values the content for GP, because they put day one games on there, so owning multi platform games still advances that position. Since Sony doesn't believe in putting day one games on a sub service, I'm not sure why they would want to take on the day to day operations of multi platform games and pay a premium to do so.

Though they did do Bungie, so it is possible.
 
mansoor1980 said:
why are xbox fans angry still? , the deal is almost done ................they should be happy
Click to expand...
You see they only have 2% of the market. They need Capcom, Sega, Konami, CDPR, Nintendo, Ouya, The Starship Enterprise to compete. Let them compete.

Oh by the way Gamepass will remain the same cost in the future after all the acquisitions. Source: Trust me Bro
 
Heisenberg007 said:
Please also name all the IPs that were taken off of the competitor platforms because of all these acquisitions.

Go on. We will wait.
Click to expand...
You and any other fearmongers have this theory that's it's guaranteed MS will cut off games from competing platforms, when in reality they havent. Even going back to MInecraft they bought in 2012 when it was just rolling, they could had cut the cord and funnel it to Xbox and PC only and didn't.

MS even offered Nintendo a 10 year deal they accepted and offered a 10 year deal to Sony (which looks like they said forget it).

Same question for you: Out of all the Mincecraft based games and Bethesda games, how many were taken off competing platforms? You still even got new games released on PS and even recently added Bethesda games to PS+.

Go on. We will wait.

Hey, at least when MS buys a company games still can go on other platforms, and PC is a guaranteed one assuming it's not a tried and true PC only kind of game. But even then MS is converting some to console like Age of Empires showing up on Xbox lately.

When Sony buys up a studio, they basically cut the cord off their multiplat games right away. Psygnosis cut the cord soon after, Naughty Dog started out as computer and Sega Genesis developers and Insomniac has made multiplat games including a slew of PC VR games. Now all walled off behind the Sony ecosystem except for PC porting years later for some games.

So if you're going to talk about platform support, MS supports other platforms a lot more than Sony does the second they get acquired.
 
StreetsofBeige said:
You and any other fearmongers have this theory that's it's guaranteed MS will cut off games from competing platforms, when in reality they havent. Even going back to MInecraft they bought in 2012 when it was just rolling, they could had cut the cord and funnel it to Xbox and PC only and didn't.

MS even offered Nintendo a 10 year deal they accepted and offered a 10 year deal to Sony (which looks like they said forget it).

Same question for you: Out of all the Mincecraft based games and Bethesda games, how many were taken off competing platforms? You still even got new games released on PS and even recently added Bethesda games to PS+.

Go on. We will wait.

Hey, at least when MS buys a company games still can go on other platforms, and PC is a guaranteed one assuming it's not a tried and true PC only kind of game. But even then MS is converting some to console like Age of Empires showing up on Xbox lately.

When Sony buys up a studio, they basically cut the cord off their multiplat games right away. Psygnosis cut the cord soon after, Naughty Dog started out as computer and Sega Genesis developers and Insomniac has made multiplat games including a slew of PC VR games. Now all walled off behind the Sony ecosystem except for PC porting years later for some games.

So if you're going to talk about platform support, MS supports other platforms a lot more than Sony does the second they get acquired.
Click to expand...
Who released the first new First Party next-gen game on the Xbox?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MS/ABK is advertising games that don't exist for data collection
46
2K
POKEYCLYDE replied
My apologies to Ubisoft, Sony, Activision, EA, MS etc. for making a big deal out of $70 games
2 3 4
156
6K
MDSLKTR replied
Microsoft, Activision Deny Report Regarding Financial Performance
Business Hardware  2 3
131
11K
Jaybe replied
What happened to all the people that were cheering over that MS Activision acquisition?
Drama  5 6 7 8 9
414
18K
GateofD replied
Microsoft has Closed the Activision Blizzard King Deal
22 23 24 25 26
1K
99K
MasterCornholio replied
Top Bottom