Bumblebeetuna
Member
He tried the same gotcha with me. People underestimate how much money MS would make from this deal, especially from the King aspect. They don’t have to remove CoD from PlayStation in order to benefit mightily.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Axios (Stephen Totilo) Lawyers: Email proves Microsoft’s ABK bid is designed to elimination (Update: MS claims it was a "thought experiment")
He tried the same gotcha with me. People underestimate how much money MS would make from this deal, especially from the King aspect. They don’t have to remove CoD from PlayStation in order to benefit mightily.
Klayzer
Member
Can't refute your arguments, so just call it emotional or to invested. Classic Microsoft fans playbook maneuvers.
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
FTFY in the context of who this is about.
Bernardougf
Member
Yeah.. not the same argument at all .. lol
Bumblebeetuna
Member
Ok, and you don’t think Sony’s end game is to drive the others out of the market? Who cares if they don’t spend 70B in one deal, they do a “death by a thousand cuts” type strategy and it works. But it’s not ScOrChEd EaRtH enough I guess
It’s business, people.
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
You're no fun
Unknown?
Member
Difference being that they had to make a good product. Being cheaper doesn't mean you automatically win or the Dreamcast would have steamrolled everyone.
Microsoft did the same that Sony did(by being a much larger company competing with a smaller one) when they entered but they flopped out of the gate and lost tons of money.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
Oh yeah, they bought Psygnosis and delayed the couple Saturn ports for a year.
Sony didn’t own Tomb Raider. If anything it was the Saturn that Tomb Raider was first revealed on.
Funny seeing you throw the revisionist term around as you try to revise history. No comment on Namco’s games huh? How about Mortal Kombat 3? WWF Wrestlemania Arcade? No mention of why only the Saturn versions were delayed, and Namco wasn’t even on the platform?
The poster I replied to was full of it, and you know it.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Ok but you're still conveniently ignoring that both CMA and EU dismissed the foreclosing argument.
If the perceived intent was a concern, it would have been a factor in not letting the acquisition go through.
Phil's words seem to have enhanced regulatory approval bodies as well.
Yep, and not to beat the dead horse one more time but if 5 people on GAF think the precedent is worth looking into, we can safely assume CMA/EU looked into it as well and they dismissed it.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Sega killed the Saturn. It was left in the 3D era dust. More expensive and less performant in the 3D arena.
They shadow dropped it, little to no marketing hype or build up. Everything you do wrong with a system in the 90s.
Ports were delayed because there was no urgency to focus on a system that was not selling well.
Like with their cloud decision?
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
See, there you go. CMA had an issue with that and are using that to block the acquisition.
They did *not* do that with the foreclosing argument.
Bernardougf
's point is moot.Thanks for having my back, Deep.
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
This is what mental gymnastics look like.See, there you go. CMA had an issue with that and are using that to block the acquisition.
They did *not* do that with the foreclosing argument.
Thanks for having my back, Deep.
Sethbacca
Member
Most of Sega's problems were of their own making. There are plenty of documentaries out there about it but they were basically throwing everything at a wall and seeing what stuck. They had the 32x, 32x CD, Saturn, and then only a few years later the Dreamcast announced because the Saturn was failing hard. Nobody wants to take the time to develop for a failing console, it's half of why MS is having trouble right now.
Realistically any talk about Sega in all of this is pointless because Sega fucked up Sega.
Last edited:
Bernardougf
Member
I'll assume, not been a lawyer, that you have to work with tangible numbers and estimates when building a case, so if the CMA tried to prove that MS will foreclosure COD/activion games they would probably have to show hard numbers that validate that from a strict business point of view and not just "evil intentions" to destroy sony ... so they concluded that not matter what they think about whar ms will or not do in the console slc the numbers did not supported their case and they chose to persue the cloud side of things were they could use their data and now numbers to support their case.
But yes CMA and all other regulatory did dismissed this part of the deal, and that changes nothing, since they did it with bethesda and now we are here. The difficult of prove the intention do not make it impossible or even improbable to happening
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
This is the comment I replied to, which I pointed out was false. Saturn was brought up because Saturn was the competing console of the time, and Sony locked a lot of games off the platform.
They sure as hell weren’t getting rid of anticompetitive practices.
Sethbacca
Member
Yeah, but this disregards that Sega was the juggernaut in this fight and Sony was the underdog. I don't remember the specifics but I remember Nintendo in particular used to be SUPER cutthroat about preventing publishers from working on other platforms because they were the 800lb gorilla of the living room. It feels a bit like you're trying to turn into black and white what should be a nuanced conversation. You can't really have the conversation without talking about all of the underlying market dynamics, and the fact is that MS is under extra scrutiny at this point because they simply have a history of the exact behavior of which they're currently being accused.
Topher
Identifies as young
You are misrepresenting what was said by the "gamers" lawyers entirely. They never said these emails were "directly related to the on-going Activision acquisition". They said "this merger is a part of that strategy" to "put its main competition, the Sony PlayStation, out of the market". So your dates prove nothing since you are inventing what was said out of thin air.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Exactly. Some people seem to think that companies spend $80 Billion and only have meetings about it 2 weeks before executing the deal.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
This is literally the headline of the article:
It is directly referencing the ongoing activision bid by name.
Topher
Identifies as young
And I'm quoting the actual text. Probably would be best if you did the same, don't you think?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
That's the author drawing conclusion, which it doesn't take rocket science to do.
Topher
Identifies as young
He made a big deal about the author apologizing so he knows this.
Bernardougf
Member
As someone already pointed out the deal was struck almost at a record time fashion with another company denying participation because of the short time to prepare ... this deal was planed long before... we just dont know how long... after 2019 probably
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
This is true. As intellectually dishonest as they come.
I know he can go low, but this topic even surprised me with him.
Topher
Identifies as young
Lots of revelations from yesterday.
Bernardougf
Member
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
Well some people also think that an entire $100 billion dollar plus strategy is laid out in a 16 line email between two people and never mentioned in any official documentation ever again, only discussed in smoky backrooms and all the documents burned like a plan for a bank robbery.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Hold on........................wat?!
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Thought experiment?
They literally admit it's real and use the most dumbest and full of shit reasonings. You can't make this shit up. Hey gamers, this is how stupid MS thinks you all are. Even the most fanatical, they think you're even dumber.
Last edited:
Bernardougf
Member
Thought experiment?
Yeah... the billions expended latter in the buying spree never seem before in this industry is just a happy coincidence
graywolf323
Member
Bernoulli
you should add this to the OPdoes Microsoft really believe they can get away with lying through their teeth because we’re too stupid to know better?
ResilientBanana
Member
I see nothing as well.
I also notice a lot of people here comparing this to Bethesda. $1B is a lot different than $30+B. They could afford to keep Bethesda to themselves. They can’t afford to keep games like COD to themselves, they make too much money to keep them on a single platform. I’m sure the extra income from Sony would be good for them though. Profiting from their success is the ultimate fuck you.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
This is how stupid they think of us. They think their fanbase is even dumber since they carry the water for them when this blatant bullshit happens.
does Microsoft really believe they can get away with lying through their teeth because we’re too stupid to know better?
Feel good that they think you're dumb as fuck? "Thank you sir, may I have another,"
midnightAI
Member
They could have also made a fortune making Starfield multiplatform (and it was in development) but they canned it to only release on XBox+PC
MS want to fill up those gamepass subscription rates, and the way to do that is make XBox way more attractive than PlayStation, you can bet that if the acquisition wasnt even questioned and had gone through by now that COD would be exclusive, they are (potentially) making it multi platform to appease the regulators to get this through, can you not see that?
FrankWza
Member
Bernardougf
Member
The same people are claiming that is perfectly fine and normal for MS to try end Sony because is business as usual and at the same time still support that they will not take away COD from sony as part of this strategy ... so you are bashing your head in the wall with this people.. they are too disingenuous to admit they were wrong and just arguing in bad faith at this point
FrankWza
Member
Or. How many pairs of socks can they water-ski behind?
Bumblebeetuna
Member
Starfield is not the same type of revenue generator CoD is. CoD is more like Minecraft or Destiny, which MS and Sony are both leaving multi platform after acquisition.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
It went from after the contract expires which they had to honor
to...
After the contract expires + 3 years
to...
10 years met with a hard no, but please don't release the details as to why it was a hard no
Their intent was plain as day from the beginning.
But hey, the new news update is "thought experiment" on a real email. This is how dumb they think of us.
Topher
Identifies as young
I see where Sony was open to FFXIV being cross play, but I would not call that as an overarching initiative. And it looks like this was spearheaded more by SE in any case.
And yes, Sony has been doing cross play with PC and their own systems for a while, but I'm talking about with other consoles, namely Xbox.
Last edited:
They would not take away COD. It would kill the IP. Some other shooter would become the go to game for a 100 million playstation users and multiple platform users. There is a reason all the big money making competive shooters are on every single device that can run it. There is a reason Microsoft didn't make minecraft exclusive. They didn't want to give other games a 100 million user base to build a competitor and become the defacto game of the genre.
Bumblebeetuna
Member
Those are all concessions MS threw out to try and appease regulators. Aren’t you for regulation? Are you one of those weirdos expecting MS to sign a forever deal for CoD or something?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
This isn't the gotcha you think it is.
Bumblebeetuna
Member
I didn’t frame it as such.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
midnightAI
Member
How do we know? it hasnt been released yet, wont release on PS5 so we have nothing to gauge it against and its made by the Skyrim developers, you know, that little game that has sold double the number of copies than any COD game ever released? add microtransactions to that and it could potentially be a money making beast.
You think a game that's built on community mods is going to make over a billion dollars a year on microtransactions? No one will pay for a microtransaction modders could copy and release for free? An expansion pack every few years sure but not a consistent microtransaction revenue stream like COD.