Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)
- Status
So if Sony bought take2 would they be required to keep bringing gta and red dead to competitors? GTA makes COD look tiny.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Last I checked Vietnam is a Communist controlled country so it turns out the Domino Theory was correct LMAO
Varteras
Gold Member
I don't take well someone being an ass earlier, shifting the conversation to an insignificant point, and then acting as if they weren't trying to derail where the conversation is heading. I've seen plenty of your posts to know how disingenuous you are. Watched you get banned for your mask slipping off and going full fanboy. Your argument lacks any substance whatsoever, so you tried "correcting" me over something that didn't need correcting because whether it was a merger or acquisition, it didn't matter to the point of the conversation. Now kick rocks. You're done, son.
Last edited:
In Cold Blood
Banned
Not in law there isn't.
The only time it's an issue is if you have a monopoly where one company can control an entire sector.
That isn't the case with MS and ABK.
You can play any MS game you want. Owning a Playstation doesn't stop you from also getting a PC or Xbox.
Solidus_T
Banned
Actually more like this:
Subscription service gamers = winner
Everyone else = nothing or worse.
Who cares though? Microsoft will be able to compete once Sony goes out of business!
havoc00
Member
After 6 the next gta is what 11 years away ? That's an eternity in this industry who knows who will be where at that point
Iced Arcade
Member
Nintendo would go bankrupt before that happened. (Which neither will)
Last edited:
Varteras
Gold Member
I don't care what they do with it. And saying GTA makes CoD look small is ridiculous and you know it. The point of the conversation was Sony's financial ability and intent.
Last edited:
Venom Snake
Member
MS didn't spend almost 80 billion to make everyone "winners".
Corporations have been accustoming us to such thinking for decades and it will probably take another one before we verify who really benefited from it.
For now, i'll remain skeptical.
Pipoqueiro
Member
Your ''you can buy a pc'' argument only shows that sony does not have a monopoly in europe
They can still buy an xbox too, they just don't want to
Sony simply just dominates the market, which is different from the absence of competition
What can quickly become different when you block the competition with infinite money
and dominates an entire infrastructure preventing the emergence of competition
And who is closer to that now, ironically, is microsoft, even though it doesn't dominate the market (yet)
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
I dont how or why anyone thinks Sony needs to dump the division. Just becaue COD "might" be gone in a few years? Sony and Activision already have a couple more years of marketing deals, so COD isn't leaving PS anytime soon.
MS also wants to make money off Sony. Didn't MS offer a 5 or 10 year deal to Jim Ryan for more COD? Take it or leave it. The offer is there.
The gaming division is Sony's biggest and most profitable division making around $2 billion or more per year in profits for around 5 years. It's not going anywhere whether COD is part of PS or not in 2026 when their current Activision deal with COD is over.
Now if Sony thinks PS will trend down forever because COD is such a big deal, then hey maybe they will try to sell off gaming to some giant company willing to pay 10's of billion to buy it off them. Doubtful.
But funny how the shoe is now on the other foot. During Xbox One, people were saying MS should dump off consoles and go software only. Now some gamers are saying Sony should dump off their entire PS division because COD might go Xbox exclusive? LOL
blacktout
Member
... Uh, the premise of Domino Theory was that if Vietnam was united under communist rule, it would trigger a wave of countries becoming communist. That's the "domino" part of the theory.
It wasn't "if Vietnam becomes communists, it will become communist." That part was kind of self evident.
Solidus_T
Banned
People have been freely using that word "monopoly" to describe Sony, which is second place out of the big 3, but when anyone accurately describes Microsoft's past and current ambitions, including their history of actually trying to monopolize, somehow it's hyperbole.
Gta5 is over 180 million copies. I will admit it is hard to compare monetization between the two since one is seasonal.
Kuwitzzer
Member
Even during Sony darkest time, they tried their best to uplift PS3 so I do not understand the slightest why some people think Playstation will be dead if Sony does not sell off their most profitable to some big tech in US.
Last edited:
Varteras
Gold Member
Yeah, I don't know how anyone thinks that is even remotely a possibility. PlayStation is a huge moneymaker for them and will be even more so if and when they go through with spinning off their financial division. Their last corporate strategy meeting made it clear. PlayStation is the company's future. Without it, they have no real direction for good growth. The rest of their entertainment arm would suffer the loss of homegrown IP and products to cross their media ventures with. They're one of the largest companies in the world with nothing greatly negative happening that would be cause to consider selling anything that ruins the growing synergy in their divisions.
Sanepar
Member
Buy t2 only make senses before gta6 launches. Even to make exclusive or launch gamepass day one depends who buys. Any other stuff doesn-t worth 30-40bn.
At this point for both(ms and sony) ea is a better target because of soccer game and bf team, respawn ans bioware.
For sony would grant survive on the long term. For ms would be the final bullet.
If I need to bet next year MS will acquire EA.
POKEYCLYDE
Member
If Sony is actually worried about a marketshare shift that lessens the gap between Playstation and Xbox, maybe not even this gen but next gen, I feel the moves they'll want to make will shore up their current relationships.
By far one of their best partners is Square Enix. And Sony is able to get permanent exclusivity from SE's flagship franchises because Microsoft's marketshare lags severely behind Sony's. If after this ABK acquisition, marketshare shifts closer to 50-50, Square Enix might not want to continue giving permanent exclusivity to Sony. That or it would be prohibitively expensive.
So if Sony is worried about that, I feel they would want to locked down that relationship via acquisition.
However, Capcom would probably be the more lucrative buy. As they've been on fire recently, nothing but 90+ releases. I'm not sure how much regulatory scrutiny they would get trying to acquire Capcom, but it would definitely be more than Square Enix. Especially if they go the acquisition route before any marketshare shift happens.
And while Sony attempts to acquire either Square Enix or Capcom, I think Microsoft will attempt smaller acquisitions, like IO interactive. Just as Sony acquired something like 3-6 studios while Microsoft was in the midst of acquiring ABK.
I don't know though, some people see this acquisition going through as an opening of the floodgates. I'm not so sure. There's a limit to how much Microsoft will be able to buy, and probably a limit to how much they want to buy. And with higher regulatory scrutiny on the gaming space going forward, it might not even be worth the hassle for Sony as the market leader.
By far one of their best partners is Square Enix. And Sony is able to get permanent exclusivity from SE's flagship franchises because Microsoft's marketshare lags severely behind Sony's. If after this ABK acquisition, marketshare shifts closer to 50-50, Square Enix might not want to continue giving permanent exclusivity to Sony. That or it would be prohibitively expensive.
So if Sony is worried about that, I feel they would want to locked down that relationship via acquisition.
However, Capcom would probably be the more lucrative buy. As they've been on fire recently, nothing but 90+ releases. I'm not sure how much regulatory scrutiny they would get trying to acquire Capcom, but it would definitely be more than Square Enix. Especially if they go the acquisition route before any marketshare shift happens.
And while Sony attempts to acquire either Square Enix or Capcom, I think Microsoft will attempt smaller acquisitions, like IO interactive. Just as Sony acquired something like 3-6 studios while Microsoft was in the midst of acquiring ABK.
I don't know though, some people see this acquisition going through as an opening of the floodgates. I'm not so sure. There's a limit to how much Microsoft will be able to buy, and probably a limit to how much they want to buy. And with higher regulatory scrutiny on the gaming space going forward, it might not even be worth the hassle for Sony as the market leader.
Sanepar
Member
I have 3 concerns about MS consolidation:
- Enforce cloud, i want to be able to play on my local hw
- ability to buy games on the long term
- what happens when they buy ea, t2 and other pubs with companies who are not on gamepass and the culture of not buy games anymore? How they sell their games? They will be forced inside gamepass?
- Enforce cloud, i want to be able to play on my local hw
- ability to buy games on the long term
- what happens when they buy ea, t2 and other pubs with companies who are not on gamepass and the culture of not buy games anymore? How they sell their games? They will be forced inside gamepass?
Varteras
Gold Member
That's the thing. GTA and RDR2 take many years to make. They may sell very well, but they are not annual releases like CoD. Even individual CoD titles sell very well and almost always top charts. If a bad CoD is made, which happens, it mostly doesn't matter because another is coming right after. If somehow a GTA is botched, that could kill something. Because at that rate you're talking another 10+ years for the next one. Both are huge, but really nothing compares to the constant annual success of CoD. Not just success. Wild success.
That is a decent point. But they have been making bank on micro transactions so it may still be worth it.
EA would be good except BioWare. It is dead compared to what they used to be.
havoc00
Member
After 6 by the time the next gta releases cod will have about 11 releases
Solidus_T
Banned
Just want to point out that there will be literally no regulatory scrutiny as this case with ABK has shown. The largest and oldest third party publisher, larger than Nintendo as a whole, is the ceiling by lightyears. It is absolutely open season and I don't think people fully understand what this really means,
Jigsaah
Gold Member
Needs? Who said anything about "needs"? I'm saying Microsoft provides pressure that was not nearly there previously with this deal. You think this isn't true? You don't think Sony now has to respond? Microsoft didn't think they could coast by in 2022. They promised a fantastic 2022. They were incompetent. They failed, miserably. That's not resting on their laurels...THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY FUCKIN LAURELS TO BEGIN WITH. You bein' serious right now?
At worst, it's a misunderstanding and a pointless one. The first console manufacturer to come out with $70 price point was SONY. Who cares about the publishers in the scope of this point?
Oh my bad, you're right. 2 years then. Is it excusable that they skipped a year? Is it enough to simply have State of Plays given what we know Sony has done in the past? 2021's showcase was 42 minutes, barely 12 minutes over what a typical State of Play. Tell me as someone who loves what Sony does, that's good enough for you? It's not good enough for me, sorry. I gave this year's showcase a C...much better than most. Check the thread, review the poll if you wish. I'm saying the new format is trash and has been since 2020. If I had a dollar for everytime I've said something to the effect of "I miss Sony's Showmanship" I'd have a couple of happy meals right now. It's gone...it's no longer personable and I refuse to make excuses for it. Moving on.
The games media? Fuck the media. I'm talking people who matter. People like you, people like me. Final Fantasy...I mean you're going in a whole other direction but sure I'll address it. Final Fantasy is a great game, but it's not Sony's game. For what it's worth I hope it does well. Hell I made an entire thread consider selling my consoles just to get the PS5 for that game. You were fuckin there dude.
VR? Eh don't really care honestly. I don't even know how it's doing. As a consumer I'm not really interested. Here's what I'm saying. The players defend Sony at every turn even though they are getting less than what they used to from them. Sure they may deliver on AAA games and if that's all that matters to you, then I guess you're happy.
What I'm seeing is a step back from traditional showmanship, an audacity to raise prices (Microsoft now doing it too, to be fair, which I also hate), things like upgrading games still meaning folks have to rebuy games, lack of any real communication with the fans outside of this joke of a show this year. You could be fine with this...I've always disliked the format change. There's plenty of improvements Sony could be making and year after year they just, don't. They got the games, but if you think that's all that makes a great platform then I don't even know why I'm responding to this. This is the definition of resting on your laurels. If you think Sony doesn't have to respond, then why aren't you just putting a laugh emoji next to my first post on this topic, calling me a fool and calling it a day.
No, that would also be resting on their laurels. I mean I've already brainstormed who Sony could buy, in this very thread. So no, you're wrong about me.
I've been okay with Sony or Microsoft buying studios. I specifically did not want THIS acquisition to go through. This was a step too far and disrupts the industry in a way that essentially sparks an arms war. One that if Microsoft wants, they could win handily. I'm searching for some semblance of an ebb and flow. Some kind of balance if you will. I want Sony and Microsoft going blow for blow, not one blowing out the other until they destroy one another. I think this scenario would best in the end for consumers like myself. That's why I felt Matt Booty's email was dangerous. That why seeing the unredacted list of studios Microsoft was looking at is daunting. I hoped that if the deal fell through that it would be reason to give Microsoft some pause. The whole ordeal still might, we'll have to see.
I think you have a decent point. But you also have red dead, while not near as big, is no slouch either.
Kilau
Member
I have a feeling you won't end up happy with those concerns.
Jigsaah
Gold Member
Sony knows quality when they see it. They just need to make the right moves and keep growing. Microsoft is not there yet. They just buy the shiniest thing they can see with no proof they can actually manage it.
You know what happens when management is poor? People start leaving. They start buying themselves out like Bungie did with Activision.
Just because this deal will likely go through doesn't mean this is permanent by any means.
Sony knows how to manage, they know content. They can go a lot further making smarter choices.
Kuwitzzer
Member
To continue with this, I think it is only fair to say it is also Sony's fault that they got themselves to where they are at the moment, losing their biggest golden goose, which is a property they do not even have control over and always in the danger of being taken away. And this is not even a current problem, remember the PS3? With the terrible launch, a complex architecture that is hard to develop for, and the trend of every single dev going multiplat, PS3 crumbled. Sony has been over reliant on 3rd party support from the PS1 inception and now, that reliance is firing back once again when a a rich and big rival wants to dry out their 3rd party support entirely. Sony should have been more careful and more attentive of the willingness of MS to support its Xbox branch. Now I am looking forwards to Sony move to see what kind of responses will they make.
Jigsaah
Gold Member
Facts, couldn't have said it better myself. All this did is give Microsoft another shot at competing. We'll see what they do with it.
havoc00
Member
The possibilities are endless, you could have iw or treyarch work on halo, the coalition work on a third person cod game etc etc
Jigsaah
Gold Member
For sure, they got a lot of maneuverability now. No doubt. They gotta hone in their management strategy. The hands off thing...feels both lazy and it's like they don't even trust themselves. Which honestly, given the track record, is probably the smartest thing to do right now. They need to fix what's going on with them internally though. Especially now that they hold so many IPs. Not managing this correctly would be catastrophic for everyone.
dibella360
Banned
Dumb question here. While I am aware that Microsoft must release COD on PlayStation (for 10 years) to uphold the EU agreement. Since Sony did not sign the agreement, where does parity stand? Are they now able to make exclusive content?
Kilau
Member
MS isn't interested in competing and never has been, in any market they've been in, ever.
VideoGameEnjoyer
Member
One thing has become clear: Lawyers, Judges, and the like are not part of this gaming world we inhabit. I think you'd get a more legitimate debate taking a random sampling of 20 NeoGaf members than what was happening there. So many comments showing that they have no idea what they were talking about. Kinda weird when it is such uninformed people making these decisions at the highest level.
I was wondering the same thing.
I think a mix is best. A studio with strong leadership like inexile or playground doesn't need to be micromanaged. The studios with out strong leadership like Compulsion or undead labs need more hands on approach. Lets not forget lots of the issues are trying to grow small studios into AAA studios. It takes time Sony had most of the ps3 generation and first part of the ps4 generation to grow its studios it takes time.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I think not having content parity would count as partial foreclosure, so that ain't happening.
POKEYCLYDE
Member
I'm not so sure. These regulatory bodies have a better idea of the industry now. Sure, a big deal was made about ABK because of the price tag and it's prominent household name Call of Duty, but in jurisdictions where Playstation's marketshare is 80-20, you don't think there'll be more scrutiny on bigger deals?
I agree that the floodgates are open for outside players like Amazon, Google, Meta and maybe even Tencent, but a high end console market was defined during this acquisition. One that gives Sony near monopolistic marketshare in some countries.
Even with Microsoft trailing behind Sony 2-1 the ABK acquisition was such an ordeal. I think it's foolish to think Sony will have an easy time buying whoever they want "because Microsoft bought ABK".
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
That's the frightening part. What scale of mass consolidation we will end up seeing going forward.
And as we even see with Microsoft, somehow even after acquiring Zenimax their gaming revenue is down compared to prior. Whether that's with accounting tricks or not, I don't know. But it means they can squeeze out more of that "we're 3rd in console gaming and would still be 3rd after [x] acquisition so let us compete!" nonsense, and regulators will more or less believe them on it.
Imagine if with ABK their gaming revenue only jumps by $4 billion instead of the expected $8 billion. Are regulators going to give two craps about why suddenly MS's gaming revenue is seeing below-expected growth, as maybe a sign management of acquired targets is going poorly (and should thus be a warning to withhold approval of further acquisitions by them)? Nope. They (regulators) simply don't understand the market to that level, they aren't paying attention to long-term patterns in behavior of these companies, certainly not Microsoft's.
Both the CMA and EC have literally said that partial foreclosure is fair game, so yes, MS is 100% going to partially foreclose content (and access of specific content) regarding COD on PS.
Some corrections here. First, Sony can easily make the argument about them as a corporation wholly competing against significantly larger companies leveraging their own full corporate power for gaming-related acquisitions. So in that sense, it doesn't matter Sony's market share in console gaming as they 1: earned it through fair competition and 2: earned it while being a much smaller corporate entity compared to much larger companies leveraging their full weight to buy their way into market prominence.
Second, the FTC are the only ones who actually defined a high-performance console market. Sony didn't, and I don't remember seeing other regulators doing that, either. Just the FTC. So by that measure, it is not a universally accepted market definition, and can be ignored.
Of course Sony would have a challenge making big acquisitions of their own; all of these companies should have a challenge in that. The process shouldn't be easy. But, it's easily possible for Sony to make those acquisitions happen even amid regulatory concerns. For starters they wouldn't be making one nearly the size of ABK. Additionally, they already have a blueprint in how they handle these publisher acquisitions in the form of Bungie. On top of that, they can justify partial or full foreclosure of software content on other gaming platforms with the right justifications, such as pointing to legacy sales of entries in the IP on competitor platforms (such as FF on Xbox), or competitors who are dominant in the mobile space that a certain target for foreclosure is meant to help Sony compete with in that space better (such as Monster Hunter on Nintendo).
Sony have plenty of options here, and some concerns aren't needed, though others are.
Believing otherwise is foolish.
Last edited:
Jigsaah
Gold Member
Sure they have. They just go about it with the strengths they have. They weren't a hardware company when they made Zune and failed. They weren't a multimedia company when they bought Mixer and failed. They weren't a phone company when they brought out the Windows Phone and failed.
They fought and won early on in the PC space. In the PC space, they obviously competed with Apple McIntosh and Linux, they won. I'm not familiar with how they won, but I doubt it was by acquiring. They had to start somewhere. You don't become a trillion dollar company just buying up everything. They solved a trillion dollar problem.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Where did they say partial foreclosure is ok ? give me some examples please.
Jigsaah
Gold Member
Ding ding ding. Leave those alone who are successful on their own. But step in with those who you bought while they had a foot in the grave. At least until Microsoft can find it's own magic...like Sony has, this is really the best way to go.
Kilau
Member
Educate yourself then. It's well documented. Your examples prove the point. When they fail, they are gone. They don't fight it out and compete, they didn't need any of those markets so they gave up when they couldn't control them. If they still somehow struggle with ABK and everything else they bought they'll ditch consoles too.
Kuwitzzer
Member
this is not a strong enough argument to go against Microsoft because Sony can always try to be better, like if Sony is competent enough then no way Microsoft can eradicate them from the market, no matter how desperately MS wants it to be. I think it is fair to say that the showcase deemed garbage by most presents Sony's complacency. This acquisition being closed will be another slap in the face to get Sony back to reality
Last edited:
Sanepar
Member
Sorry but we are talking about the biggest publisher here. He is right. If MS takes ea they will have 4 of top10 franchises nowadays(new fifa, cod, minecraft and apex) and even bf on their hands almost all relevant fps, rpgs on their portfolio. It is over if that happens.
Sony will need at least a partnership with someone with cash on hands to stay relevant.
thicc_girls_are_teh_best
Member
In the CMA's updated PF, they dismissed console SLC concerns and one of the sections they specified pertained to partial foreclosure. Basically, saying that partial foreclosure of COD content on PS would not cause a significant shift in audiences from one platform to the other.
Whether people agree with that or not is up for debate, but that's what the CMA decided. The EC shared similar opinions, AFAIK. I don't have links to the actual parts of the CMA's updated PF though, hopefully someone else does.
Solidus_T
Banned
First of all to the bolded, stop using the word "monopoly" to describe Sony. Consumers can buy other consoles, they just prefer Playstation. That is not a monopoly and you and others really need to stop that bullshit. I get second hand embarrassment every time I read it.
Second, and to the main points, Regulators have no clue how this industry works and what they have just allowed. Microsoft will keep going - and according to legal precedent, it is not foolish to think that there will be no scrutiny since the highest of the highs has been allowed for them. I wasn't really referring to Sony buying any pubs, though I think they may and even Sony will have an easy time, but they don't have near unlimited funds like Microsoft.
Also, per the regulators poor understanding of the industry, in the event of some unlikely scrutiny, who's to say that Microsoft won't pull the "poor us, we suck" dance in court to justify buying up the next largest publisher after ABK?
Kuwitzzer
Member
Did Nintendo need to partner with anyone when their consoles were deprived of 3rd party support by Sony with the PS1 and PS2? No, they changed to save themselves and succeeded, now it's Sony turn.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked