Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
gothmog
Gold Member
Some company that has so much money they can worry about control rather than revenue? You're aware this is Microsoft, right?
Nothing1234
Banned
I honestly think Apex Legends ate their lunch.
Kvally
Member
They said it's *provisional* and they're still looking for feedback on the updated findings.
There's also a new deadline for this feedback.
Although the focus is now on cloud market.
But your post was not about the chances of this deal getting approved, it was about how Microsoft would handle COD.
About that making the game totally exclusive even if Sony doesn't sign would be really difficult, they would face investigations, expensive fines, their reputation with regulators ruined and an enormous public backlash.
They could take the perks Sony has for themselves after current contracts if Sony doesn't sign something with them before the final ruling is done and the acquisition is effectively happening.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Last edited:
Nothing1234
Banned
Bruh.
Andodalf
Banned
MS is a publicly traded company. They have a fiduciary duty to their shareholders. The CMA and other global bodies have said that there is no financial incintice in the near or long term to make COD exclusive. Doing so would lose, per the CMA, Billions of dollars a year. They would be sued. Not just the company, the actual individual members of the C suite. They could face criminal charges for Fraud. They will not risk jail to "stick it" to sony
MasterCornholio
Member
The Tourmaline Gorilla
Banned
Well, Japan's FTC equivalent gave the deal the green light.
This is happening.
If you thought the console wars were bad before this deal came into existence... Well... Let's strap in for the ride; it's going to be a wild one.
This is happening.
If you thought the console wars were bad before this deal came into existence... Well... Let's strap in for the ride; it's going to be a wild one.
Lone Wolf
Member
I'll never understand foot fetishes.
Why can't y'all be normal.
Makoto-Yuki
Banned
Here we go. Who will be next to approve it? UK? 
Unlikely that a developer owned by Microsoft and developing games for a global Audience can go out of business.
Regulators know the difference between an OS and a storefront.
Competition in the gaming PC space is between Microsoft Store, EGS and Steam. And MS first party titles show up on Steam day one.
Kvally
Member
One of the best websites in the world! Wikifeet!
Well, Japan's FTC equivalent gave the deal the green light.
This is happening.
If you thought the console wars were bad before this deal came into existence... Well... Let's strap in for the ride; it's going to be a wild one.
Why nothing changes for years. It won't be until a single player game is made exclusive years from now. Most likely when Microsoft pulls studios like toys for bob out of call of duty purgatory.
3liteDragon
Member
What's the TLDR on this? What are the other parties complaining about?
Offense was dated 2004. Nearly 20 years ago.
EU fines were rejigged back in 2006 to up to 10% of annual turnover. And MS appealed and went through multiple negotiations to mitigate the last fines they received.
In today's world, they won't risk their relationship with the commission. Not to mention the fact that any fines would significantly outweigh any benefits of taking the IP exclusive.
gothmog
Gold Member
That's not how business works. Microsoft has been fined many times for violations. Nobody got sued or put in jail. You're talking out your ass.
Andodalf
Banned
?? This isn't about violating any agreements with regulatory bodies. Read more closely. This is about being sued by investors for violation of fiduciary duty by taking actions that are known to incur Billions of dollars of losses with no expectation of profitability. I know this is a complex idea, so If it's too confusing, don't worry about it, and just trust that the international courts know more than you about that issue.
feynoob
Banned
If MS were to actually take the game from PS, no one will trust them, and they will jeopardize their future purchase.
We may joke around here, but that action has a serious consequences if they were ever to do that.
Yep lose 10's of billions to gain 2% market share using CMA numbers. Also open the door for another game take COD spot as the top shooter that's on all platforms. It fear of losing to another game made Microsoft expand minecraft access. They didnt want to give robolex or other games the opening to steal large portions of the market. GAAS thrives being on as many platforms as possible. Hence why i think both sony and Microsoft will release some gaas everywhere to try and get that fortnight level cash.
Will need to have a look, there doesn't seem to be much actual information of what their complaints were:
Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/micros...n-europe-about-its-cloud-services-11647463334
So it seems costs, there are still other complaints that I think are harder to resolve like the one from NextCloud, they are more concerned with MS bundling in cloud services into windows 11 aka OneDrive.
gothmog
Gold Member
I wasn't saying they were going to explicitly remove the game. But they may push the boundaries of the letter of the agreement. We don't really know. Microsoft, much like every tech giant, tries to not get paralyzed by fear of violating regulations. I expect them to get fined over this at some point not because they were twirling their moustaches trying to be evil, but because they stepped into a gray area and the regulating bodies didn't agree that it was harmless.
As if they aren't dead already
HoofHearted
Member
Last edited:
Kvally
Member
Yeah, hers are horrible.Could be worse..
Topher
Identifies as young
Disregard. Not related
Last edited:
Pelta88
Member
You do realize that Unreal Engine is not a real person, right?
Last edited:
Kvally
Member
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
suspicious mind
Member
So is it still impossible for ms to buy a japanese publusher when the us puts pressure on the japanese government?
I kinda feel like this has nothing to do with the abk situation. Maybe phill went to japan tried to make some deals and ran into some walls. Who knows.
I kinda feel like this has nothing to do with the abk situation. Maybe phill went to japan tried to make some deals and ran into some walls. Who knows.
That is the market Microsoft had every incentive to make COD only on xcloud. The locally run game was never going to become exclusive. Regulators finally figured that out. Once the CMA got all the numbers it was plain as day losing 2 billion a year was not worth 2% market share. The value for call of duty was gamepass and the cloud. A yearly holiday release to promote the hell out of gamepass and xbox during the console buying season.
This is a separate thing, most of the big tech companies have at least 2/3 investigations globally. Generally around the same topics.
I wonder how Amazon would respond to the open licensing proposal, they already do something similar with Ubisoft iirc.
Astray
Member
I think the default reaction to anything that guy in particular says is "he's lying".
Topher
Identifies as young
A few members of Congress writing some well-timed/campaign financed letters is not putting "pressure on the Japanese government".
Oh.....I see. Not related to ABK. Couldn't read the bloomberg article, but found the gist of the complaint here.
graywolf323
Member
or more like PR speak/half-truths, Phil is very much a politician type
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I think MS had the marketing rights for this regardless of the acquisition, the recent TV spots have the Xbox branding as well.
Astray
Member
Call it what you wanna call it, but that guy is a liar, simple and plain. I have never seen someone who is so astroturfed down people's throats with zero business achievements or creative input.
I literally bought an Xbox Series X for the new good exclusives that are coming any minute and it took 2 years for anything good to land.
I know, may not stop some people.
Topher
Identifies as young
If that is what someone thinks then that is up to them. Personally, I don't think so, but I think a lie should also be an outright lie and not some fuzzy contradiction. In this case, it is pretty cut and dry. If COD stops coming to PS natively with feature parity then I'll have my answer.
We've seen plenty of bundles this gen. Why would this one be controversial?
Last edited:
Topher
Identifies as young
I get your disappointment, but how does that make Phil Spencer a liar?
Yeah, it seems like the timeline looks like this
OVH and Aruba filed a complaint in Summer 2021, it was reported 17th May 2022
Microsoft offered concessions on the 18th May 2022
CISPE ( who OVH and Aruba are a part of) filed a complaint in November 2022, saying that they need more changes
OVH and others (not CISPE) come to agreement with MS in March 2023
I wonder what new concessions MS offered OVH and the others this week.
It shouldn't be. Probably overthinking this honestly.
GHG
Gold Member
It's fucking business. What do you expect Sony to do? You want them to play nice? Should they tell publishers/developers they want to overpay for the deals they agree to? Tell publishers/developers that they shouldn't see the opportunity in having their product(s) being heavily marketed to one of the largest and most active console userbases? Tell publishers/developers not to agree to the terms set out in contracts even if they are happy to do so?
It's up to their competition to bring something to the table that differentiates themselves and makes them attracting both to potential customers and to potential business partners. If they have something unique then it circumvents anything Sony could ever do to make things more difficult for them. That's what everyone's favourite word "competition" is supposed to breed.
Some of you are just as soft and spineless as the current leadership at Xbox. You never heard any of this crap when Peter Moore was in charge. You never heard him cry, he just got on with the job and did what was necessary to make waves and do deals. It's no coincidence that he's built tremendous success everywhere he's been since.
Last edited:
Iced Arcade
Member
Last edited:
ChorizoPicozo
Member
Thirty7ven
Banned
You are implying that because Sony is the market leader they can't make deals. Similar to people implying that they can't buy a publisher because they are market leaders. On the same token MS can do all the type of deals they want because they aren't market leaders. Effectively they could buy everything and everyone until they are market leaders?
The logic doesn't hold up. Sony doesn't tell third parties that either they accept their deals or their games won't be on PlayStation. Therefore they are not leveraging their market position.
Using market position means doing something only your market position allows you. Nothing stops MS from making those deals, and after spending 75B on the biggest IPs you can't defend the concept that it's not financially feasible.
- Status