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.
PaintTinJr said:
Nintendo would get a bigger piece of the pie - like they would have with the Gamecube absent Xbox - as a natural order of things in negotiations is to use another as a stalking horse, and either Nintendo or another - superior competitor than Microsoft, probably Valve - would enter the market in the high-end console space with appropriate hardware to run third party games and to provide encouragement for first party development.

If all the current players' brands were gone, the games industry - and the very talented people that want to make games - would still exist plying their trade - even if Microsoft and Windows, and Office :) was gone too.
Click to expand...
You aren't talking about the core issue.

Without MS money, Someone like Xbox wouldn't survive against PS, because of Japan. PS advantage in Japan is nothing to scuff, considering Sega, Capcom, square, Konami are all Japanese publishers, who will prioritize sales of their region first at most. In this case, PS would have a huge advantage.

If Companies like Valve and activitision were to have their own console, they will need to compete in that region. And it won't be an easy task to accomplish. 1 gen is enough to lose huge amount of userbase and content wise.
 
feynoob said:
You aren't talking about the core issue.

Without MS money, Someone like Xbox wouldn't survive against PS, because of Japan. PS advantage in Japan is nothing to scuff, considering Sega, Capcom, square, Konami are all Japanese publishers, who will prioritize sales of their region first at most. In this case, PS would have a huge advantage.

If Companies like Valve and activitision were to have their own console, they will need to compete in that region. And it won't be an easy task to accomplish. 1 gen is enough to lose huge amount of userbase and content wise.
Click to expand...
Huh? Japanese publishers will prioritize the markets where they sell the most games. That is not Japan anymore. Japan has roughly 10% of the PS5s sold. The US alone is ~ 4x bigger in terms of PS5 install base. These numbers are why we see fewer distinctly Japanese games from Japanese developers on PlayStation. No sane publisher would prioritize 1/10th of the market just because it is in their home country.
 
Ozriel said:
If you stream GeForce Now on a Chromebook or a Linux desktop, you still own the game on Steam. You can play it via download on compatible hardware.

Ownership isn't taken away from you just because your current device can't play the game natively.
Click to expand...
It more of a joke, saying how far will this be taken. That said not all services will offer Steam purchase support, so there is that. Just a bit of a bad look that regardless of where you go, the purchaser and the cloud providers could be locked into an MS controlled ecosystem.
 
Zathalus said:
Nintendo has exactly zero incentive to move from the handheld domination they have now. It's been over two decades since they competed in the high end space. The failures of the GameCube had very little to do with Xbox and everything to do with Sony domination that gen. The focus overlap between Xbox and GameCube was insignificant next to the PS2 and GameCube overlap. The lack of DVD playback was also a contributing factor.

Valve is also not going to make a major impact on the console space, they know what their audience likes and a closed console like environment is not that. They may offer something like a Steambox for a console price point, but as with the Steamdeck it's going to be fully open and targeted at power users, not the console crowd. Sales would be insignificant compared to the current consoles and regular PCs.

Realistically, considering the barrier to entry, the home console market is not going to get a third player anytime soon. The sheer cost and investment to compete with the current players is immense. You would need to target dozens of countries, establish a massive marketing presence, start the entire process of API and console design at a attractive price point, develop a entire software development framework, create dozens of custom APIs, work with publishers, get IP, start exclusives, etc, etc, etc.

Something like that would take years and tens of billions of dollars to enter a industry that is established and difficult to penetrate.

Face it, Microsoft is the only competition that Sony has for the home console space.
Click to expand...
The Gamecube would have sold twice as many units and they wouldn't have used the $500M they got from their half sale of Rare to subsidize the console too, so blaming PlayStation for Xbox eating half their lunch and forcing them to differentiate their offerings from then on, is something we disagree on quite clearly.

I do agree that the DVD and more general fisher price toy styling was a big issue back then as consoles came of age - and would have limited their sales to 40m IMO - but times have vastly changed, no more format wars, no real API wars other than DirectX versus everyone., and free middleware engine entry licensing all beyond the level of Unreal2 back then would make setting up the cheapest it has ever been, so Nintendo could offer an additional box for under the TV at Series S to X specs for $500/£500 and would easily sell more than Xbox - absent Xbox - based on their current brand status with Pokemon, Wii and handhelds IMO.

Nintendo wouldn't even need to treat the box as a priority platform, just a secondary option for their handheld software, and publishers would still support it to hold PlayStation at bay, while getting more benefit from their existing commitments to Nintendo's handheld SDK, if it was unified across console and handheld.

My assertion is Xbox bought out the second home console platform seat from under Nintendo, and Nintendo would return if they only had to compete with PlayStation(or anyone else) on game quality alone for their seat at the table,
 
nikolino840 said:
Click to expand...

Got to love Florian's stance on this now.



Sony try to quash a subpoena and he goes into full length articles how Sony will live to regret the day they fought back or the market definitions that were being argued, and how they live in a glass house.

Nintendo try and quash a subpoena on the other hand and the FTC are apparently desperate now. Must not be the fact that Nintendo publisher and developer relations might also be relevant to what he was arguing against.
 
Last edited:
feynoob said:
You aren't talking about the core issue.

Without MS money, Someone like Xbox wouldn't survive against PS, because of Japan. PS advantage in Japan is nothing to scuff, considering Sega, Capcom, square, Konami are all Japanese publishers, who will prioritize sales of their region first at most. In this case, PS would have a huge advantage.

If Companies like Valve and activitision were to have their own console, they will need to compete in that region. And it won't be an easy task to accomplish. 1 gen is enough to lose huge amount of userbase and content wise.
Click to expand...
ATVI already compete in that region with King mobile and are probably crushing it as we speak given that Sega are wanting a bigger piece of their home (smartphone/handheld) gaming market by trying to spend nearly a billion on Rovio.
 
King gets about 300m for the apac region (about 11% of thier subsegment), Blizzard generates 522m and Activision is 259m for the year.
 
Last edited:
KungFucius said:
Huh? Japanese publishers will prioritize the markets where they sell the most games. That is not Japan anymore. Japan has roughly 10% of the PS5s sold. The US alone is ~ 4x bigger in terms of PS5 install base. These numbers are why we see fewer distinctly Japanese games from Japanese developers on PlayStation. No sane publisher would prioritize 1/10th of the market just because it is in their home country.
Click to expand...
Distinctly Japanese games that won't sell well in the West are all on the Switch which is selling very healthy in Japan. There's a reason why something like Shin Megami Tensei V is Switch exclusive. Despite being UE4 and easy to port to PS4/PS5, Atlus didn't even bother.
 
PaintTinJr said:
The Gamecube would have sold twice as many units and they wouldn't have used the $500M they got from their half sale of Rare to subsidize the console too, so blaming PlayStation for Xbox eating half their lunch and forcing them to differentiate their offerings from then on, is something we disagree on quite clearly.

I do agree that the DVD and more general fisher price toy styling was a big issue back then as consoles came of age - and would have limited their sales to 40m IMO - but times have vastly changed, no more format wars, no real API wars other than DirectX versus everyone., and free middleware engine entry licensing all beyond the level of Unreal2 back then would make setting up the cheapest it has ever been, so Nintendo could offer an additional box for under the TV at Series S to X specs for $500/£500 and would easily sell more than Xbox - absent Xbox - based on their current brand status with Pokemon, Wii and handhelds IMO.

Nintendo wouldn't even need to treat the box as a priority platform, just a secondary option for their handheld software, and publishers would still support it to hold PlayStation at bay, while getting more benefit from their existing commitments to Nintendo's handheld SDK, if it was unified across console and handheld.

My assertion is Xbox bought out the second home console platform seat from under Nintendo, and Nintendo would return if they only had to compete with PlayStation(or anyone else) on game quality alone for their seat at the table,
Click to expand...
Assuming everybody that bought a Xbox would have bought a GameCube has no basis in reality. We have no exact way of knowing what would have changed, but a 100% conversion rate is simply not on the cards. The main draw of the Xbox was shooters, multiplayer, DVD playback, newness and interested PC players. None of which the GameCube offered. The GameCubes main draw was Nintendo's offerings, so those who cared for it picked it up. The GameCube was also dirt cheap so I doubt cost was a factor. But 20 vs 30 million would have had little impact. The Wii would have still been the Wii and enjoyed the success it did.

In the end the decision that led to Nintendo focusing on handheld was to do with the failures of the Wii U and not the GameCube, arguing otherwise ignores the massive success of the Wii, which was a home console. But Nintendo going its own way has been on the cards since the 64, and abundantly clear with the Wii launch.

As for the modern console space, Nintendo has zero incentive to actually move from the hybrid (mainly handheld) approach they have now. Having another console is just going to split development and sales with very little benefit. People buy Nintendo because it's Nintendo, not because they want to play CoD on it. With DLSS future Switch hardware will have little issues in displaying 4k content anyway in docked mode. The current approach for Nintendo clearly works for them, it combines the utter domination they have enjoyed in handhelds for over 30 years without needing to have a home console to split the playerbase.

With Nintendo not interested who else would bother and have the resources competing? Apple? Amazon? Google? All seem unlikely, especially with the failures in gaming that Amazon and Google have had.
 
Three said:
You think the former wasn't? Why do you think she asked that before going on to ask what it was actually concerning?
Click to expand...
They both are, was just a bit of a joke. Although I do think regulators should probably focus more on competition in specific markets than trying to control global wealth distribution.
 
Unknown Soldier said:
Distinctly Japanese games that won't sell well in the West are all on the Switch which is selling very healthy in Japan. There's a reason why something like Shin Megami Tensei V is Switch exclusive. Despite being UE4 and easy to port to PS4/PS5, Atlus didn't even bother.
Click to expand...
Nintendo published the game in the PAL regions.
 
Three said:
Got to love Florian's stance on this now.



Sony try to quash a subpoena and he goes into full length articles how Sony will live to regret the day they fought back or the market definitions that were being argued, and how they live in a glass house.

Nintendo try and quash a subpoena on the other hand and the FTC are apparently desperate now. Must not be the fact that Nintendo publisher and developer relations might also be relevant to what he was arguing against.
Click to expand...

That Foss guy is nothing more than a microsoft bootlicker on par with dipshits like colt.
 
KungFucius said:
Huh? Japanese publishers will prioritize the markets where they sell the most games. That is not Japan anymore. Japan has roughly 10% of the PS5s sold. The US alone is ~ 4x bigger in terms of PS5 install base. These numbers are why we see fewer distinctly Japanese games from Japanese developers on PlayStation. No sane publisher would prioritize 1/10th of the market just because it is in their home country.
Click to expand...
Because Japanese people are the audience, not the western.
 
It's going to be hilarious if this isnt resolved by the summer and Playstation have a trailer for the new call of duty on their presentation with exclusive content and xbox get to show nothing in theirs :messenger_grinning_sweat:
 
Mephisto40 said:
It's going to be hilarious if this isnt resolved by the summer and Playstation have a trailer for the new call of duty on their presentation with exclusive content and xbox get to show nothing in theirs :messenger_grinning_sweat:
Click to expand...

Even if it's 'resolved' tomorrow, as long as PS's existing marketing contract with Activision is still going, they can and will still do that.
 
drganon said:
That Foss guy is nothing more than a microsoft bootlicker on par with dipshits like colt.
Click to expand...
Pretty much, just that this is a professional. The U-turn on his stance is just whats astounding to me.

You had Sony arguing to quash or limit its subpoena given limited time to provide a bunch of documents and he was posting takes like this:

It is part and parcel of Microsoft's fundamental rights as a defendant to be allowed to take discovery of third parties. All the facts must be put on the table in order for Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) D. Michael Chappell in Washington (and soon also United States District Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley in San Francisco, at some point with the assistance of a jury) to be able to make the right decisions. If Sony doesn't like that, it can always cut things short by accepting the ten-year Call of Duty license that Microsoft has publicly offered.... Sony's own business model is "fair game" for discovery in this context...Some of Sony's dirty linen may get washed in public when those Activision Blizzard cases go to trial--and come back to haunt Sony.
Click to expand...

Now Nintendo get a subpoena for one person who deals with publisher and developer relations to just show up in court in August or later and he's here arguing that they should have done it sooner, how the FTC is desperate etc.




What happened to the judge being able to make the right decision? What happened to a company maybe not wanting their dirty linen washed in a public trial? Why is he not happy about supporting this subpoena now in particular? You should see his flipflop on SEPs now compared to 2011.
 
Last edited:
Mephisto40 said:
It's going to be hilarious if this isnt resolved by the summer and Playstation have a trailer for the new call of duty on their presentation with exclusive content and xbox get to show nothing in theirs :messenger_grinning_sweat:
Click to expand...
Isn't that still going to happen anyway since Sony has the marketing contract for another year or so?
 
reinking said:
Mrs. Harshbarger was having trouble reading the script Nadella provided her. :messenger_tears_of_joy: jk<-- for those that take this topic too serious.
Click to expand...
They've sided with Tony

6e8f60663b8d7547413e9723a9c2c6120e793583.gif
 
Three said:
Pretty much, just that this is a professional. The U-turn on his stance is just whats astounding to me.

You had Sony arguing to quash or limit its subpoena given limited time to provide a bunch of documents and he was posting takes like this:



Now Nintendo get a subpoena for one person who deals with publisher and developer relations to just show up in court in August or later and he's here arguing that they should have done it sooner, how the FTC is desperate etc.




What happened to the judge being able to make the right decision? What happened to a company maybe not wanting their dirty linen washed in a public trial? Why is he not happy about supporting this subpoena now in particular?
Click to expand...

"Fame" "Internet points" "sucking to Twitter audience" "being jealous of Idas".

Guy got massive ego.
 
- Final report coming on April 26th or the day before.

- The addendum to the PF, something "exceptional" and "very unusual", was probably done to mitigate the risk of a third party (Sony) questioning the final decision. The CMA could have just dropped the theory of harm but without a detailed explanation about the change, that could have opened the door to a complaint about procedural irregularities.

- One lawyer expects the CMA to impose behavioural remedies.

- The same lawyer believes that an appeal by Sony is unlikely to succeed.
Click to expand...

Original source is: https://www.equityreport.co.uk/exce...osoft-activision-blizzard-merger-say-lawyers/ via Idas

If you are getting around the paywall, please share
 
Last edited:
Varteras said:
Funny enough, Duncan complains about the European DMA and how it hurts American companies. More specifically, Google and Apple. Yet, without the DMA, Microsoft has virtually no shot at being able to compete with them in the mobile space. So, he's actually in support of an American global duopoly that even other powerful American companies can't crack. I'm not a fan of Khan, she's trying to make a name for herself more than make honest calls, but she was being cut off before explaining her point and then being baited into answering questions in a way that lacked context or nuance. Duncan and Bilirakis are Republicans looking to politically assassinate someone Biden put in place. Right off the bat, they complained about lacking Republicans within the FTC. It's all a political game. This has nothing to do with "what's right and proper".
Click to expand...

Well when the FTC is mandated to be bipartisan and literally only Democrats as commisioners currently it's bias of the tallest order.

*due to firings and quitting because of Khan's workplace and leadership direction of the FTC.
 
ToadMan said:
MS isn't a business like that. Neither are any of the big Techs. They're not there to make "healthy" 10% or even 30% returns - they're there to dominate and make 300% returns having destroyed the market place and competition.

And it's you, me and all content consumers who'll pay for them to make that money.
Click to expand...

Microsoft is fully in business in multiple areas where they have little to no chance of dominance, such as Cloud and Search. Tens of billions invested there.

Saying Big Tech aren't in it for 30% profit margins is just nonsense.
 
feynoob said:
If Companies like Valve and activitision were to have their own console, they will need to compete in that region. And it won't be an easy task to accomplish. 1 gen is enough to lose huge amount of userbase and content wise.
Click to expand...

I think you could basically skip Japan and still be okay. The bigger fallacy in @PaintTinJr thought process there is assuming that any market that loses an entrant will fill any gap by some miraculous new entity. If that were the case the regulatory agencies looking at this deal wouldn't even exist as no one would care what MS was doing because if Sony and Nintendo folded there would just be new faces to replace them. The console business is a veritable graveyard of failed attempts, it takes a lot of money to even achieve the position that MS enjoys with Xbox.

If a field with only three entrants loses a key player the majority of that business is just being split by the other two, resulting in even less competition and a worse situation for consumers. This is why the mobile carrier market is so scrutinized when mergers come up, etc. Same with the auto industry and others. The cost of entry and odds of long-term success are just too prohibitive to have an eyes wide shut stance in these areas.
 
Last edited:
DaGwaphics said:
I think you could basically skip Japan and still be okay. The bigger fallacy in @PaintTinJr thought process there is assuming that any market that loses an entrant will fill any gap by some miraculous new entity. If that were the case the regulatory agencies looking at this deal wouldn't even exist as no one would care what MS was doing because if Sony and Nintendo folded there would just be new faces to replace them. The console business is a veritable graveyard of failed attempts, it takes a lot of money to even achieve the position that MS enjoys with Xbox.

If a field with only three entrants loses a key player the majority of that business is just being split by the other two, resulting in even less competition and a worse situation for consumers. This is why the mobile carrier market is so scrutinized when mergers come up, etc. Same with the auto industry and others. The cost of entry and odds of long-term success are just too prohibitive to have an eyes wide shut stance in these areas.
Click to expand...
Losing Japan would allow other companies to have exclusive games from those publishers.

Case in point, final fantasy games.
 
POKEYCLYDE said:
I still don't get it.

If they're safe guarding against a future where consumers can no longer own the video games they play, alright, very cool. I like that remedy.

But.. if it's providing the option to download a game on a cloud streaming service, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.. as offline play wouldn't be possible from a cloud streaming provider.
Click to expand...
How technology facilitates that experience does not matter. On XSX, you can play cloud games and download games for offline play. So maybe something like that?

How MS will manage that on a device that is not capable of running something natively will be interesting. I don't think they will have to for those devices, just the ones that could play them natively is where I think that might apply?
 
reksveks said:
news.sky.com

Microsoft to showcase at No 10 as Activison ruling lands

The tech behemoth will take part in a games industry event in Downing Street next week on the same day that the CMA is due to rule on its takeover of the Call of Duty maker, Sky News understands.
news.sky.com news.sky.com

Conspiracy theories in 3,2,....
Click to expand...

What's No 10?

edit: oh 10 Downing St.

Also Sarah Bond seems to be perpetually in the UK for a while now, I think MS are keeping her there as their point-man there until the CMA and EU situations are done.
 
Last edited:
After all this mess is finished i'll be interested to see if MS magically ramps up their gaming output and console sales since they no longer have to worry about looking *too* good to regulators haha
 
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
98K
MasterCornholio replied
Top Bottom