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.
DaGwaphics said:
I doubt these regulatory groups would see it like that. The timed exclusives from the dominant party could be used as an almost complete foreclosure strategy against rivals. Exactly who is buying the consistently a year or two behind box?

Especially in a case where the dominant party is leveraging their size and the % percentage of sales expected on the larger platform to negotiate these deals in dollar amounts that are illogical/unpractical for their smaller rivals.
Click to expand...
Making 3-5 AAA timed exclusives every year can cause series harm that is on par of acquisition.

You are making users leave that platform due to these practices.
 
feynoob said:
Making 3-5 AAA timed exclusives every year can cause series harm that is on par of acquisition.

You are making users leave that platform due to these practices.
Click to expand...

Not really because acquisitions are permanent. Some people can wait while others won't. At least they have the option of waiting instead of getting another system.
 
MasterCornholio said:
Not really because acquisitions are permanent. Some people can wait while others won't. At least they have the option of waiting instead of getting another system.
Click to expand...
Yeah but FOMO and our society's concepts of wants and needs is all screwed up. So this idea of waiting is on par with human rights violations. At least if it's exclusive forever you know and don't have to agonize over when it is coming.

I wish I was 100% joking but this honestly seems like how some people act about timed exclusives.
 
MasterCornholio said:
Not really because acquisitions are permanent. Some people can wait while others won't. At least they have the option of waiting instead of getting another system.
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter how much you wait, you are essentially denying that platform the access of products that you don't own.

MS/Sony are paying these publishers money in order for them to not put those games on PS/Xbox.
 
reksveks said:
I am sure that someone would file a case to claim it to be unlawful. I had to figure out which bill it was, it was introduced by Warren and a couple of other Democratic senators.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/3847

It's a non-starter imo.
Click to expand...

Oh.....so that is what the twitter post was summarizing. Yeah, that would give the FTC some teeth, but there's no way that is going to pass. Republicans will prevent a vote in the Senate via filibuster. Otherwise, it would just die in the House.
 
feynoob said:
Doesn't matter how much you wait, you are essentially denying that platform the access of products that you don't own.

MS/Sony are paying these publishers money in order for them to not put those games on PS/Xbox.
Click to expand...

But only temporarily which isn't as bad for consumers as permanently. You understand the difference right?
 
GHG said:
That's the thing, you can't go from one extreme to the other in a single move, it's just not feasible.

Nothing is structured in a way that would make such a move viable. The FTC and by extension the SEC have been in a coma since their inception, hence the current situation.
Click to expand...

People complain about lack of innovation, risk taking and competitive playing fields and then cheer for consolidation like the 21st century hipster cucks they are.

And the regulators? Between outdated laws and political pressure, nothing gets done.
 
MasterCornholio said:
But only temporarily which isn't as bad for consumers as permanently. You understand the difference right?
Click to expand...
So where is ff7r on Xbox?
What about forspoken 2 years?
Is ff16 guaranteed to be on Xbox after the 1 year deal?

For now, it's just wait for these period. Soon, it will be 2 years or entire gen.
 
feynoob said:
So where is ff7r on Xbox?
What about forspoken 2 years?
Is ff16 guaranteed to be on Xbox after the 1 year deal?

For now, it's just wait for these period. Soon, it will be 2 years or entire gen.
Click to expand...

That's up to the developers to release those games on Xbox once the timed exclusive deals are over. It's not Sonys job to make those developers release those games on Xbox.

With permanent exclusives games will never come to those platforms. Like Spiderman for example.

Hopefully you understand the difference now and stop treating timed exclusives like they are permanent exclusives.
 
MasterCornholio said:
That's up to the developers to release those games on Xbox once the timed exclusive deals are over. It's not Sonys job to make those developers release those games on Xbox.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately we don't know if Sony has purchased extended exclusivity, like they have done in the past. So we can't be sure that it is up to the devs. All contracts and exclusivity is not made public.
 
Third party exclusives usually mean projects at third parties get funded with lower risks.

There should be more competition for exclusives and timed exclusives, not less.

Some of you have been brainwashed.
 
MasterCornholio said:
That's up to the developers to release those games on Xbox once the timed exclusive deals are over. It's not Sonys job to make those developers release those games on Xbox.

With permanent exclusives games will never come to those platforms. Like Spiderman for example.

Hopefully you understand the difference now and stop treating timed exclusives like they are permanent exclusives.
Click to expand...
Again, it's these excuses. Wait for developers to release their games on x platforms after these deals. Just say i

At least with permanent exclusives you don't have to wait for them, unlike timed exclusives. You know it won't come to your system.
 
Topher said:
Khan is more focused on creating precedent in case law than winning cases. MS lawyers will eat her alive.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't be so sure. Yes she's being brave but it's not like she's going after their smaller acquisitions. Picking the biggest acquisition in Microsoft's history is not a bad place to start if you want to try and do things differently to your predecessors.

She was always the final boss for this acquisition and I've said so from the start.
 
Kvally said:
Unfortunately we don't know if Sony has purchased extended exclusivity, like they have done in the past. So we can't be sure that it is up to the devs. All contracts and exclusivity is not made public.
Click to expand...

Well then it isnt a timed exclusive then is it?

In a typical timed exclusivity agreement once its over developers can bring the game to other platforms. Like how Silent Hill 2 will end up on other platforms once the agreement ends.

Neither situation is ideal for consumers but with timed exclusives it's temporary. Many people can wait for the other versions. Which I have done in the past.
 
Last edited:
Topher said:
Congress won't be approving or disproving this. Ultimately a judge decides of the merger is legal or illegal. Congress make laws. Agencies implement those laws. Courts determine if the laws/decisions are constitutional/correct if challenged.

That twitter post is a pipedream. Congress doesn't have the ability to shut out the courts from intervening.
Click to expand...
Our government is too worried about that the TikToks and the WiFis are grooming and stealing our children lol That whole hearing was an embarrassment to the US.. Our government is so old they can't even figure out how e-mail works.. sad.
 
feynoob said:
Again, it's these excuses. Wait for developers to release their games on x platforms after these deals. Just say i

At least with permanent exclusives you don't have to wait for them, unlike timed exclusives. You know it won't come to your system.
Click to expand...

Actually your the only one coming up with excuses. And its funny how your saying permanent exclusives are better for consumers than timed ones. Just because there's no doubt about the game releasing on their platform.

Trust me timed exclusives are better because eventually the game will reach other groups after they are over. Like what happened with Tomb Raider for example.
 
feynoob said:
Again, it's these excuses. Wait for developers to release their games on x platforms after these deals. Just say i

At least with permanent exclusives you don't have to wait for them, unlike timed exclusives. You know it won't come to your system.
Click to expand...

They released the game on PC so what is your problem? Maybe you should ask yourself the question if Square is willing to develop FF for Xbox.

I can see why they do not see the point of bringing it to Xbox. Maybe Xbox wants it on Gamepass and Square might have rejected that. Or Square just do not see the benefit since it cost them more then they will sell on that platform.
 
fred420170 said:
Our government is too worried about that the TikToks and the WiFis are grooming and stealing our children lol That whole hearing was an embarrassment to the US.. Our government is so old they can't even figure out how e-mail works.. sad.
Click to expand...

Are you joking? In it's international form Tiktok does not exist in China, if that doesn't set off alarm bells I don't know what will.

The world as a whole would be a better place if social media was scrutinised more, especially social media that is run/controlled by governments.

Is it hypocritical? Yes. Is it embarrassing/wrong? No.
 
GHG said:
Wouldn't be so sure. Yes she's being brave but it's not like she's going after their smaller acquisitions. Picking the biggest acquisition in Microsoft's history is not a bad place to start if you want to try and do things differently to your predecessors.

She was always the final boss for this acquisition and I've said so from the start.
Click to expand...

Time will tell. This isn't the first time I've seen references to her focusing on creating precedents over winning decisions though. Sounds to me that she knows she cannot win. I'll be happy to be wrong.
 
Thirty7ven said:
Oh no a smart educated woman actually trying to do her job and protect competition?

Burn the witch.
Click to expand...
I like Khan and Kanter, I think Kantar is the more efficient leader out of the two. I do think a part of the game is knowing what resources that you have and making the most out of those.

I think Kanter is sadly going to have very similar issues very soon re: all of their cases.
 
Last edited:
Lina_Khan%2C_FTC_Chair_%28cropped%29.jpg


VS

Lulu_Cheng_Meservey.png


fight

714.gif
 
MasterCornholio said:
Actually your the only one coming up with excuses. And its funny how your saying permanent exclusives are better for consumers than timed ones. Just because there's no doubt about the game releasing on their platform.

Trust me timed exclusives are better because eventually the game will reach other groups after they are over. Like what happened with Tomb Raider for example.
Click to expand...
You aren't seeing the point here.
It's not about whether timed /permanent exclusive good or bad for the consumer It's about what it does for the other platforms.

MS can essentially make 5-10 games timed exclusive with their money and block popular titles from PS using that method without buying these publishers.
That is what timed exclusive can do.

Regulators can't do shit about it, because it's perfectly legal as that practice is just normal business.

Snake29 said:
They released the game on PC so what is your problem? Maybe you should ask yourself the question if Square is willing to develop FF for Xbox.

I can see why they do not see the point of bringing it to Xbox. Maybe Xbox wants it on Gamepass and Square might have rejected that. Or Square just do not see the benefit since it cost them more then they will sell on that platform.
Click to expand...
My issues is the long term effects for these timed exclusives. The time when MS/Sony can essentially do 5 or more games.
 
Snake29 said:
They released the game on PC so what is your problem? Maybe you should ask yourself the question if Square is willing to develop FF for Xbox.

I can see why they do not see the point of bringing it to Xbox. Maybe Xbox wants it on Gamepass and Square might have rejected that. Or Square just do not see the benefit since it cost them more then they will sell on that platform.
Click to expand...

I don't think Microsoft would force developers to release games on gamepass unless they are 1st party. If anything it's provably because Square isn't interested in the hit to sales if they went with the gamepass release option. But then again with enough money Microsoft can probably convince Square to take that option.

Without seeing the actual contracts it's hard to say why FF7 isn't on Xbox.
 
ChorizoPicozo said:
For justice i guess.

it seems Lina is the only regulator around the world "actually trying to do her job".
Click to expand...

Joke all you want. How come UEFA can sanction a club involved in a new football competition like the super league?

How can UEFA/FIFA leverage its position to expel clubs that start a non UEFA/FIFA competition?

It is what is. Meanwhile let's force Apple to start opening up its iOS because we have these giants who want a piece.
 
Last edited:
feynoob said:
You aren't seeing the point here.
It's not about whether timed /permanent exclusive good or bad for the consumer It's about what it does for the other platforms.

MS can essentially make 5-10 games timed exclusive with their money and block popular titles from PS using that method without buying these publishers.
That is what timed exclusive can do.

Regulators can't do shit about it, because it's perfectly legal as that practice is just normal business.


My issues is the long term effects for these timed exclusives. The time when MS/Sony can essentially do 5 or more games.
Click to expand...

It's timed exclusive, ended up on pc. At this point it's done so far. It might never be released on Xbox, because Square might never wanted it to be on that platform. Money doesn't always turn up into all kinds of timed exclusives. publishers or devs also looking at the platform itself.
 
Last edited:
feynoob said:
You aren't seeing the point here.
It's not about whether timed /permanent exclusive good or bad for the consumer It's about what it does for the other platforms.

MS can essentially make 5-10 games timed exclusive with their money and block popular titles from PS using that method without buying these publishers.
That is what timed exclusive can do.

Regulators can't do shit about it, because it's perfectly legal as that practice is just normal business.
Click to expand...

I actually do see the point here. But I'm not saying that timed exclusives are equivalent to permanent exclusives which is what I believe your saying.

Eventually those games will come to other platforms. With permanent exclusives they won't.

Hopefully you know the difference.

But seriously do you really understand the difference between the two?
 
GHG said:
Are you joking? In it's international form Tiktok does not exist in China, if that doesn't set off alarm bells I don't know what will.

The world as a whole would be a better place if social media was scrutinised more, especially social media that is run/controlled by governments.

Is it hypocritical? Yes. Is it embarrassing/wrong? No.
Click to expand...
Is any app in China the same as the "international form"? China takes it's great firewall seriously.
 
MasterCornholio said:
I actually do see the point here. But I'm not saying that timed exclusives are equivalent to permanent exclusives which is what I believe your saying.

Eventually those games will come to other platforms. With permanent exclusives they won't.

Hopefully you know the difference.

But seriously do you really understand the difference between the two?
Click to expand...
Why do you think they call it permanen/timed
 
Last edited:
How people can praise a business person that only cares about her bonus. The fanboy will take nothing, Lulu cares because is all about money, a LOT of money. How people can be so stupid to praise corps, ceos?
 
Snake29 said:
They released the game on PC so what is your problem? Maybe you should ask yourself the question if Square is willing to develop FF for Xbox.
Click to expand...
Isn't this true for any game Xbox has 'exclusive' as well? Some people claim that Xbox has no exclusives at all. Starfield, Redfall, and the next Elder Scrolls will all hit PC and you won't need an Xbox to play any of them. In fact you can stream them on Game pass ultimate and you wouldn't need a PC either. No point in complaining about Xbox when you don't even need one to play their games.
 
Topher said:
Dude....those images are huge. lol

Everytime I see Khan, I see....

maxresdefault.jpg
Click to expand...

Anytime I see a man annonymously denigrate a woman's looks, I think it speaks volumes about that individual actual life.

To be abundently clear, nobody on the forum gave a fuck about how Khan looked until she was identified as someone who could potentially block microsoft's acquisition. How sad is that? Check the search history/recipts... Not a single mention of this woman until they saw her as a threat to a prefered plastic box. That shit is pathetic.
 
Last edited:
DarkMage619 said:
Isn't this true for any game Xbox has 'exclusive' as well? Some people claim that Xbox has no exclusives at all. Starfield, Redfall, and the next Elder Scrolls will all hit PC and you won't need an Xbox to play any of them. In fact you can stream them on Game pass ultimate and you wouldn't need a PC either. No point in complaining about Xbox when you don't even need one to play their games.
Click to expand...

Square isn't acquired by Sony (yet). You are comparing games that are from a publisher which MS has acquired...
 
Last edited:
MasterCornholio said:
That's up to the developers to release those games on Xbox once the timed exclusive deals are over. It's not Sonys job to make those developers release those games on Xbox.

With permanent exclusives games will never come to those platforms. Like Spiderman for example.

Hopefully you understand the difference now and stop treating timed exclusives like they are permanent exclusives.
Click to expand...
Minor damage to the user??
You speak as if the users decide according to their patience. Users choose according to the imminent and certain catalog.

If you, as market leader, can pay and secure each year 4-5 temporary exclusives from large AAA franchises for periods of 1 or 2+ years (even hinting at the possibility of ending up being a total exclusive) ...... the effects on the user's decision when it comes to choose platform and it's effects in to market competitiveness can be perfectly the same as a complete exclusives.
 
Topher said:
Khan is more focused on creating precedent in case law than winning cases. MS lawyers will eat her alive.
Click to expand...

Whether someone is for or against the consolidation you are 100% right, it will be an embarrassment.

"We don't need the facts, just go... just stomp your feet and bang some pots and pans" It'll work, right guys???
 
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