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.
I'm not lost. au contraire, I've achieved enlightenment.

The industry is rotten to the core and it needs saving. Starting with PlayStation and Jim fucking Ryan

SWsWo3p.png
 
feynoob said:
It's going that way.
It's best for Sony and MS to make more money.
Click to expand...

If MS or Sony think they can go streaming only the gaming the they'll be out of the gaming market faster than Activision could make one COD game.

The market DOES NOT want a streaming only console generation!
 
splattered said:
Damn so they only got a 10 year deal after all...? Surprised they signed anything then. Has to be more to the contract then that we haven't seen yet?
Click to expand...

If the intention is to sway the CMA probably a part of the deal includes COD being streamable on Plus as well or something in those lines.
 
Last edited:
If this rollercoaster has thought me anything, its that the max chaos option triggers when everything seems to go way too positive in either direction:

Expect ABK to suddenly walk away from the deal on the 18th and wanting their $3 billion, even though the online narrative seems to be its a done deal. Then Microsoft refuses to pay and they accuse ABK of not acting in good faith to bring the deal to a close and they sue each other and an ugly court battle between them erupts LOL
 
mckmas8808 said:
If MS or Sony think they can go streaming only the gaming the they'll be out of the gaming market faster than Activision could make one COD game.

The market DOES NOT want a streaming only console generation!
Click to expand...

That shift is inevitable. Not only are companies pushing for it because it's more profitable, it also represents lower entry point for consumers (even though at long term is probably more expensive). General computing is shifting to the cloud because of its several advantages, gaming won't be any different.
And no, I do not like it, but I see this shift everyday at work. We are deploying more and more to the cloud and everything is being designed with the cloud in mind.

Also, "the market" is a silly term. Mass consumers couldn't care less, if they can't notice the difference.
 
Last edited:
mckmas8808 said:
If MS or Sony think they can go streaming only the gaming the they'll be out of the gaming market faster than Activision could make one COD game.

The market DOES NOT want a streaming only console generation!
Click to expand...
That is where you are wrong.
You are not the target for them.
The people who will buy in to these system are those who are born after 2000. Those kids who grow up with ipad. The new tech generation are the ones who will superhead cloud gaming.

Us older folks will be phased out by these new generation.

The next console is slated for 2028. That is 28 years since 2000. You know where I am going with this.
 
Per Tom, the new 10 year agreement between Sony and MS is *only* for Call of Duty. Sony was offered *ALL* Activision games last year but they did not agree with that deal at that point.


 
Goalus said:
We all know that streaming will never take off, and physical discs are and will be the preferred way of delivering games to customers. Spending money on an imaginary streaming business that will never exist in the future therefore cannot be anti-competitive. Rather, it's a huge waste of money.
Click to expand...
Given that like 80% of games sales are digital these days, I doubt it.

Bernoulli Bernoulli better delete that bro, think you're gonna get banned.
 
Last edited:
POKEYCLYDE said:
I don't believe Sony has signed any contract and really the reason for Microsoft giving out contracts is over.

Microsoft needed to appease regulators whose major concern was a substantial lessening of competition in the console space. The CMA and EC both dropped the console SLC and focused on cloud concerns. The FTC still majorly focused on console concerns, but the FTC's case has been shown to be weak and Microsoft doesn't need to extend a contract to Sony to appease the FTC. Not that a contract between Microsoft and Sony would have appeased the FTC anyway.

So my bet is that Microsoft doesn't give Sony a contract, but they continue to release CoD on Playstation regardless. Doing so not only generates a metric fuckton of revenue for Microsoft, but it would be something Microsoft can point to in future acquisition endeavors to say "We stuck true to our word of releasing CoD on Playstation even when we were not contractually obligated to".
Click to expand...
Soon as I ask this todays news drops...such is the way of the world.
 
adamsapple said:
Per Tom, the new 10 year agreement between Sony and MS is *only* for Call of Duty. Sony was offered *ALL* Activision games last year but they did not agree with that deal at that point.


Click to expand...

This is the May 2022 deal, by the way, which is not even for 10 years. The final deal (COD for 10 years) was offered in August 2022.

Tom is just sharing this with a clickbaity headline for clicks and engagement.
 
Elios83 said:
We'll see what happens.
Do you think that if Microsoft gives up on the cloud gaming market in the UK and they only license games to other cloud providers there, no loopholes allowed, CMA is still going to block this?
I doubt it.
If it happens it will be the final twist in this whole ordeal but the chance imo is very low.
Click to expand...
That block is exactly what will happen if the CMA/CAT apply the legislation they are required to follow, so that is what I expect, but as I said, we are in WMD Iraq war reports situation, so the CMA might not be the obstacle it appears, just like that report wasn't. The smell test is do Microsoft get everything they actual wanted from this deal via the suggested remedies? The answer is, yes which means it doesn't resolve the SLC, because the SLC requires them to structurally not be in a position to leverage Activision's game library in cloud throughout the world.

The chance isn't low. If we now say the CMA/CAT breaking the law is 50/50, then the deal being accepted is 50/50. I still think it is close to zero the CMA break the law, but am always ready to be disappointed, and have seen things like the WMD report get ignored completely in my life.
 
Last edited:
Call of Duty still coming to PlayStation is arguably expected. I'm surprised they held on as long as they did.

Blizzard puts out a new Diablo like once a decade, StarCraft isn't a console franchise and Overwatch, imo has been destroyed by all the negative things they've done since OW2 released(canceled PvE depth, horrid balancing, etc)

I still maintain you're going to see a counter acquisition by Sony and I'm willing to wager it'll be Square-Enix, considering Jim's statements about how well their partnership is doing.

Square-Enix itself is a big thing for the Japanese market(well, it still is but maybe not as big as it used to be).

I know people have said "Uh oh, more copium or fearmongering", but I realistically believe this whole thing(2 bought publishers in a few years time) is going to start an acquisition/exclusivity spree that we've not seen before on both sides.
 
Last edited:
Moridianae said:
Call of Duty still coming to PlayStation is arguably expected. I'm surprised they held on as long as they did.

Blizzard puts out a new Diablo like once a decade, StarCraft isn't a console franchise and Overwatch, imo has been destroyed by all the negative things they've done since OW2 released(canceled PvE depth, horrid balancing, etc)

I still maintain you're going to see a counter acquisition by Sony and I'm willing to wager it'll be Square-Enix, considering Jim's statements about how well their partnership is doing.

Square-Enix itself is a big thing for the Japanese market(well, it still is but maybe not as big as it used to be).

I know people have said "Uh oh, more copium or fearmongering", but I realistically believe this whole thing(2 bought publishers in a few years time) is going to start an acquisition/exclusivity spree that we've not seen before on both sides.
Click to expand...
Only rockstar is equivalent to activision blizzard and cod.. but is sad if become exclusive
 
PaintTinJr said:
That block is exactly what will happen if the CMA/CAT apply the legislation they are required to follow, so that is what I expect, but as I said, we are in WMD Iraq war reports situation, so the CMA might not be the obstacle it appears, just like that report wasn't. The smell test is do Microsoft get everything they actual wanted from this deal via the suggested remedies? The answer is, yes which means it doesn't resolve the SLC, because the SLC requires them to structurally not be in a position to leverage Activision's game library in cloud throughout the world.

The chance isn't low. If we now say the CMA/CAT breaking the law is 50/50, then the deal being accepted is 50/50. I still think it is close to zero the CMA break the law, but am always read to be disappointed, and have seen thinks like the WMD report get ignored completely
Click to expand...
What you have is only few information.
I think you need to wait for overall information before making a decision.
Something is going behind the scenes. No reason for Sony to accept this deal, if the CMA is going to block it.
 
adamsapple said:
Per Tom, the new 10 year agreement between Sony and MS is *only* for Call of Duty. Sony was offered *ALL* Activision games last year but they did not agree with that deal at that point.


Click to expand...

so it was either all ABK games until 2027 or COD until 2033?

I mean I get why they went with the latter, also shows you that Microsoft intends to take everything they can exclusive
 
Pipoqueiro said:
Only rockstar is equivalent to activision blizzard and cod.. but is sad if become exclusive
Click to expand...
Rockstar is like Bethesda at this point.
They take too long for their games, considering how big they are.
And if Sony makes it exclusive to PS, they will lose a lot of money.
For Xbox case, they have gamepass to offset some of those lost sales. I doubt Sony can handle those massive amount of lost sales.

Their only option would be day1 with PC.
 
Last edited:
mckmas8808 said:
They had no other option at this point. Gotta do what you gotta do.
Click to expand...
pretty much, the FTC was the only one still fighting it over consoles

if the CMA does end up allowing the deal with only cloud concerns addressed like it's been rumored, Sony is better off agreeing to something now while there's still any leverage
 
Jigsaah said:
I don't think it will either. Too much money to be made. It's gotta subsidize Bethesda games being exclusive too and on gamepass. I think it's very unlikely COD ever goes exclusive.

They still gotta release games on Steam and now Switch based on the deals they struck. Playstation would get a similar deal if Jim would just sign the damn thing.
Click to expand...

Not one to say I told you so, buuuuuuuuuuut. I told you so.
 
Last edited:
feynoob said:
What you have is only few information.
I think you need to wait for overall information before making a decision.
Something is going behind the scenes. No reason for Sony to accept this deal, if the CMA is going to block it.
Click to expand...
They can't go behind the scenes as you put it, because that is in breach of their duty to the tax payer . The process is legally required to be transparent to everyone - concerned parties. The vast information we have is their 500page report, their willingness to defend it in court if absolutely necessary, and their tweets to dispel fake news coming from Microsoft funded shills. What more info do you need to know to make a decision?
 
Moridianae said:
I know people have said "Uh oh, more copium or fearmongering", but I realistically believe this whole thing(2 bought publishers in a few years time) is going to start an acquisition/exclusivity spree that we've not seen before.
Click to expand...
Pretty much.
I wouldn't know if regulators will be fine with Microsoft buying more stuff, though.

Except for the US where the mega corporations own the politicians through campaign donations and the regulators are so short-handed they can only go after small fish (i.e. if you're rich you're above the law and the
plebs will even cheer on you).
 
Sony itself make this case to be all about Call of Duty, so for them the other ABK games are pretty much irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
PaintTinJr said:
They can't go behind the scenes as you put it, because that is in breach of their duty to the tax payer . The process is legally required to be transparent to everyone - concerned parties. The vast information we have is their 500page report, their willingness to defend it in court if absolutely necessary, and their tweets to dispel fake news coming from Microsoft funded shills. What more info do you need to know to make a decision?
Click to expand...
Man, you have no idea how much shit the government is.
You are putting too much faith on the CMA.

If anything, they are like other government bodies.
 
I would assume this was one of the conditions of the CMA to get through, but originally Sony didn't want to sign it. Sounds like the deal got worse too despite their previous offers and Sony posturing?
 
graywolf323 said:
so it was either all ABK games until 2027 or COD until 2033?

I mean I get why they went with the latter, also shows you that Microsoft intends to take everything they can exclusive
Click to expand...
And that's why i want everything they touch to sink
Make everything exclusive, i want all the financial reports to be red
200.gif
 
I really want to know what the implications are going to be for xCloud in the UK. Hypothetically if the deal closes and if what i'm reading materialises; CoD will come to Gamepass (PC & Console) but xCloud license will be sold off? Does that mean that UK users of GPU cannot access xCloud anymore? Does that mean, to access xCloud content the user will have to pay for another subscription to regain the content? Or does it means that it will be kind like a EA Access scenario. EA Access is available on Gamepass and available on other services too.
 
Warablo said:
I would assume this was one of the conditions of the CMA to get through, but originally Sony didn't want to sign it. Sounds like the deal got worse too despite their previous offers and Sony posturing?
Click to expand...
CMA didn't care about consoles
And the deal was worse before because it was only 3 years
Playstation contract ends in 2024
 
Warablo said:
I would assume this was one of the conditions of the CMA to get through, but originally Sony didn't want to sign it. Sounds like the deal got worse too despite their previous offers and Sony posturing?
Click to expand...
The one in the Tweet is just the shitty 3 year deal that Jim said was shit. (CoD marketing ends in 2024).
 
Sanepar said:
Besides cod and since diablo just released, there is nothing relevant until 2027.
Click to expand...
Well i forgot something. There is 2 diablo4 expansions being developed. Maybe no expansions for playstation? :O

One thing is clear PS need to make smart moves to have content for bargain, there is a few gems out there yet:

For rpgs: larian and cdpr
Japan: from, capcom and ok.... square
I would say remedy would be a good add with 800 staff
 
PaintTinJr said:
That block is exactly what will happen if the CMA/CAT apply the legislation they are required to follow, so that is what I expect, but as I said, we are in WMD Iraq war reports situation, so the CMA might not be the obstacle it appears, just like that report wasn't. The smell test is do Microsoft get everything they actual wanted from this deal via the suggested remedies? The answer is, yes which means it doesn't resolve the SLC, because the SLC requires them to structurally not be in a position to leverage Activision's game library in cloud throughout the world.

The chance isn't low. If we now say the CMA/CAT breaking the law is 50/50, then the deal being accepted is 50/50. I still think it is close to zero the CMA break the law, but am always ready to be disappointed, and have seen things like the WMD report get ignored completely in my life.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that CMA has the power to rule and be concerned about happens throughout the world?
Shouldn't their only concern be about the UK market alone?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
‘Microsoft’ said they were streamlining 9000 people across XGS/ABK/ZM
Rumor 
19
454
Topher replied
Microsoft wins FTC appeal challenging $69 billion Activision Blizzard deal
News Business  2 3
125
3K
Unknown? replied
MS/ABK is advertising games that don't exist for data collection
46
3K
POKEYCLYDE replied
My apologies to Ubisoft, Sony, Activision, EA, MS etc. for making a big deal out of $70 games
2 3 4
156
8K
MDSLKTR replied
Battlefield 6 Beta |OT| Open Beta/Closed Weapons.
|OT|  60 61 62 63 64
3K
5K
S0ULZB0URNE replied
Top Bottom