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

Do you believe the deal will be approved?


  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah, but who would pay $70 to play COD when you can play for $14 a month. At that point it might as well be exclusive.

The same people who paid for MLB The Show, Atomic Heart and WoLong on PlayStation? Including many here in this forum?

PlayStation is the console market leader, and COD players on that platform are already used to paying $70 to play. Most people aren't going to switch.
 
The same people who paid for MLB The Show, Atomic Heart and WoLong on PlayStation? Including many here in this forum?

PlayStation is the console market leader, and COD players on that platform are already used to paying $70 to play. Most people aren't going to switch.
How do you figure?
 
Yeah, but who would pay $70 to play COD when you can play for $14 a month. At that point it might as well be exclusive.

Game Pass is $180 a year. There's a ton of people who only play COD and maybe one or two other games. Owning the game is a lot more attractive in that scenario than continually getting hit with recurring payments.

I've said it before, the subscription model used by other media formats (music/tv/movies), like Netflix/HBO/Hulu/Spotify, doesn't translate to video games, because gamers consume their content in a much different way. People will play the same game for hundreds of hours.
 
Last edited:
I kind of wish Jim Ryan would have put MS through a series of hilarious contractual obligations, like, "Give us Elder Scrolls 6 and other titles and we stop whining." I'm pretty sure MS would have been game for that.

The chances of them putting forward a deal like this are about as high as your chances of winning the lottery.

I think people are missing sonys obvious objective of just justifying giant purchases of thier own down the line even though people are convinced sony can't afford a large aquisition. They will use this song and dance down the line for large "defensive aquisitions" which would have be hard as the market leader but Microsoft has opened the door for them.

A whole different ball game when you're the dominant market leader, outselling the competition nearly 2:1. Especially when you've got no track record of putting any of your first party games on competing hardware.

How do you figure?

Because Sony still has their blockbuster first party exclusives, and they're skilled at marketing them.
 
Yeah, but who would pay $70 to play COD when you can play for $14 a month. At that point it might as well be exclusive.
That's not xboxs problem. I'm sure Sony would have the option to put the game on their service similar to what xbox does with games like MLB.

Just because it harms Sony doesn't make it anti-consumer
 
A whole different ball game when you're the dominant market leader, outselling the competition nearly 2:1. Especially when you've got no track record of putting any of your first party games on competing hardware.
thats why destiny and MLB the show are so important.
 
We've been quoting the FOSS Patents guy and Pachter in this thread. Not sure any of them are known for their gaming exploits.

When did you start drawing the line?

I don't know who FOSS is. Pachter is qualified. We qualify his advice according to our own assessment of the situation. Post has been online unapologetically confirming the fact that he does not game while trying to make money off gamers. That's fraud to me.

I'd never take advice or pay attention about my vehicle from someone who can't drive or know anything about an engine. Post is self-proclaimed fraud. You're free to give him all the credence you choose to. I can't promo fraud, irrespective of the message that comes with it.
 
In this thread people are so entrenched in their arguments to the point that calling out a fraud becomes problematic.

I didn't refer to what Postup posted because I know him as a gaming fraud. He came up on podcasts making rap songs about getting youtube money. He does not game. I don't need proof because this is something he has admitted numerous times, literally live on air/podcasts. He is here to push a narrative and again, admitted on podcasts, make money off the XBOX community.

When Post first appeared on podcasts his first claim was that he was an "insider." His source: Github. And he has evolved into making claims that he can make money off the XBOX audience. This isn't about COD or any regulator. It's about someone who claims to be a gamer but doesn't have a gaming score or trophy to speak of. I'm simply calling out a fraud for being a fraud. Nothing less or more.
I am skeptical because it is far to easy to accuse someone of something with no evidence see Chris Avellone. PostUp is just as valid as Red Dragon meaning he is just another Twitter voice. I don't take his word any more seriously than I'd take yours. At least it appears he was actually referencing what he was talking about so that lends a little to his credibility.
 
it doesn't matter

it proves that the games was being made on PS5 and microsoft cancelled it

You think the CMA didn't figure out that a multiplatform dev would have been making a multiplatform game prior to the acquisition?

There was never a "keep Bethesda games multiplatform" condition to approving that acquisition.

The game releases May 2023. Bethesda acquisition completed March 2021. Not sure it does your arguments any favor when you consider the PlayStation build was scrapped more than 2 years to release.

I don't know who FOSS is. Pachter is qualified. We qualify his advice according to our own assessment of the situation. Post has been online unapologetically confirming the fact that he does not game while trying to make money off gamers. That's fraud to me.

I'd never take advice or pay attention about my vehicle from someone who can't drive or know anything about an engine. Post is self-proclaimed fraud. You're free to give him all the credence you choose to. I can't promo fraud, irrespective of the message that comes with it.

The tweet you took exception to just contained verbatim some of the arguments to the CMA. No personal opinion whatsoever.

It's like going into hysterics because someone you didn't like looked outside in a thunderstorm and told you it was raining.
 
I don't know. GP getting CoD day and date I suspect will be a pretty big deal. Sony will be OK tho.

Don't get me wrong, COD on GP would be a big deal for the service. But it's more likely it'll lead to more multiple console ownership situations than people switching ecosystem completely
 
Last edited:
I am skeptical because it is far to easy to accuse someone of something with no evidence see Chris Avellone. PostUp is just as valid as Red Dragon meaning he is just another Twitter voice. I don't take his word any more seriously than I'd take yours. At least it appears he was actually referencing what he was talking about so that lends a little to his credibility.

99% of us here speak from experience. I'm not suggesting you take any advice or commentary as more important than the next. I'm saying that this individual "post up" is an admitted gaming fraud. As you know, there are a lot of them who leach of our hobby. Post up is one of them...
 
It's like going into hysterics because someone you didn't like looked outside in a thunderstorm and told you it was raining.

What?

I tend to never converse with you because your takes are forever slanted. I'm calling out the guy for admitting he's a fraud and you interpret that as hysterics?!
 
99% of us here speak from experience. I'm not suggesting you take any advice or commentary as more important than the next. I'm saying that this individual "post up" is an admitted gaming fraud. As you know, there are a lot of them who leach of our hobby. Post up is one of them...


So do you have any comment on the actual news quotes or are you just going to keep diverting about Post Up ?

Game Pass is $180 a year. There's a ton of people who only play COD and maybe one or two other games. Owning the game is a lot more attractive in that scenario than continually getting hit with recurring payments.

I've said it before, the subscription model used by other media formats (music/tv/movies), like Netflix/HBO/Hulu/Spotify, doesn't translate to video games, because gamers consume their content in a much different way. People will play the same game for hundreds of hours.


Just a small correction, game pass is $120 a year. Game Pass Ultimate is $180.

But it can be dropped to as low as $61 per year via gold > GPU conversion.
 
Last edited:
C'mon Lulu, where is your tweet?!
Hd Reaction GIF by MOODMAN
 
Data were also saying that CMA reversing their preliminary findings was almost impossible to happen and yet...:messenger_tears_of_joy:
It's funny how the lesson was not learned.

Let's see what happens with for CMA and EU final decisions, what they're going to ask, how the FTC is going to react, if someone will try to appeal. These things are all chapters to be written in this drama.

Personally I believe that at this point Sony is mostly interested in dragging this thing as long as possible and make it as painful as it can be for MS. It's basically legal deterrence for the future.
Agreed. The worst part about this situation for PlayStation is that they already have the marketing rights, so they are hog tied to promoting something that is in direct opposition to where they could better use their platform's power; either to call Microsoft shareholder's bluff by saying that they will block CoD on PlayStation if the acquisition goes through - and show Microsoft to be liars with regulators by not dropping the deal despite claim the deal doesn't work without PlayStation sales. Or by redirecting that Platform marketing effort immediately towards another 3rd party's FPS game to displace CoD sales on PlayStation to damage the value of a $70B asset a competition is allegedly buying on the strength of CoD sales on all platforms including PlayStation.

The longer the deal takes to close, the less time PlayStation has to wait working against its own interests to use its platform power to raise a competing 3rd party FPS up. In theory, with PlayStations ABK contract for COD, if the deal doesn't close until after the renegotiation terms, PlayStation can theoretically buy a new deal, and ABK (probably MSFT in reality) would have to treat the deal as if they acquisition wasn't in play to avoid a conflict of interest.

I still have every confidence in the CMA here in the UK to block the deal, even if it ultimately passes with the CAT, as just a stalling tactic to help competitors get more time to adjust to an impeding SLC in the console market and to give more time for cloud competitors to enter the market.


Jim is spot-on with his assessment IMO. With CoD full owned by Microsoft, the result of one CoD being substandard on PlayStation would be the same as Betamax or HD-DVD missing out on a new high profile film release, leading to a catastrophe for the format(game IP on PlayStation). Unlike, when multiplatform, where every release is a reset and a chance to be the preferred version.
Jim referencing DF is really interesting and I'd hate to be Richard getting a call to give evidence in a CAT legal battle. Forgetting the PS4 900p launch window AC game to match marketing deal X1's 900p with less than or equal to Xbox clause Ubisoft and Microsoft confirmed to DF, Richard will have no plausible deniability to all the shenanigans that took place in the PS3/360 gen,
 
i'm surprised CMA made that u turn because it makes no sense, in less than a month they reviewd what took them 9 months to do before?
i think if they are serious we will get another delay


Sony has identified and explained what it believes are four errors with the CMA's lifetime value (LTV) data model. SIE legal counsel believes that the CMA's data model "understates the gains" made from foreclosure strategies and is off by at least 70%.

Sony says Microsoft told the European Commission that it has no incentive to foreclose access to Bethesda/ZeniMax games, but games like Redfall, Starfield, and Elder Scrolls VI are exclusive to Xbox. Sony thinks MSFT could do the same with Call of Duty.

https://www.tweaktown.com/news/9098...-evidence-of-microsofts-real-plans/index.html
 
Last edited:
i'm surprised CMA made that u turn because it makes no sense, in less than a month they reviewd what took them 9 months to do before?
i think if they are serious we will get another delay


Sony has identified and explained what it believes are four errors with the CMA's lifetime value (LTV) data model. SIE legal counsel believes that the CMA's data model "understates the gains" made from foreclosure strategies and is off by at least 70%.
[/URL]

Sony says Microsoft told the European Commission that it has no incentive to foreclose access to Bethesda/ZeniMax games, but games like Redfall, Starfield, and Elder Scrolls VI are exclusive to Xbox. Sony thinks MSFT could do the same with Call of Duty. https://www.tweaktown.com/news/9098...-evidence-of-microsofts-real-plans/index.html
Sony has a safeguard against this though. Nintendo was smart enough to sign the 10-year agreement.
 
The chances of them putting forward a deal like this are about as high as your chances of winning the lottery.

Early on, I think MS may have jumped at the chance to make all the bad buzz go away. That's obviously not going to happen now.

I don't think Jimbo has played his cards right and now it looks like he goes home the ultimate loser.

I still have every confidence in the CMA here in the UK to block the deal

Famous last words?
 
Last edited:
CMA has lost credibility in any case.
If they block Microsoft will go to CAT claiming their analysis is bullshit affected by mistakes.
If they approve Sony will use the U-turn to do the same and tell CAT that the whole procedure was compromised by mistakes and there was no time to re-examine the evidence.

And they'd be both right. The u-turn was just eggs on their faces by the cma.
So if the governing body states they have issues with your acquisition and suggest remedies then you negotiate these remedies and then come back with appropriate remedies to satisfy the governing body that they shouldn't have the right to reverse their original complaint? I think I replied to the wrong comment
 
Last edited:
I was wondering the same thing.

Confused Hanna Barbera GIF by Warner Archive
It's quite possible that I may have misunderstood some of the earlier posts…

that being said.. based on what I read earlier today… it's pretty evident this may finally be done… and after the week I've just had… I'm still fucking drinking…
 
If...or maybe when this deal goes through, the meltdowns on Gaf are going to go down on history.

I've gone from "the deal is a lock" to the "deal is dead" to "maybe" in about 8 months' time. Seeing some of the "experts" on this forum pretend every single twist and turn mirrors their expectations precisely is hilarious to watch.

And staking your reputation on something you have no control over...while pretending there's not some underlying bias to your argument...while posting obviously biased commentary...based on personal patronage?

Vintage GAF.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom