Lawyers are mercenaries. They entire profession is based on the notion of arguing a position to the best of their ability based upon whom is paying their fees. Your argument assumes quasi-moral authority and shows you really do not understand what you are arguing.
So Hoeg is being paid by Microsoft to argue in their favor, despite parroting the statements from the other big publishers after questioned by regulators, who own the other indistry-leading games in the genre after CoD? It's all some big conspiracy, says the fanboy who wants Sony to buy and lockdown SE, From Software, Bandai Namco and "get some preferential treatment arrangement" from Capcom?
If a single party assuming control of CoD, ID's properties and their technological adjuncts like Wolfenstein, Halo, Bethesda/Zenimax's RPG flavoured-variants, all the while paying for preferential exposure of titles from EA, and newcomers like PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds doesn't reek of trying to corner the market.
So, let me get this straight without laughing you out of the topic. Since 2000-2001 (when Microsoft purchased Bungie) up until late 2022, Microsoft have been trying to corner the FPS market? That's what you got? That's their grand plan? 22 year 4D chess? Oh boy, you got 'em!
I super love the part where you desperately try to inflate your tinfoilhattery by adding "Bethesda/Zenimax's RPG variants" (
), "preferrential exposore for EA titles" (while quoted earlier saying Sony should do the same thing,
verbatim), and... PUBG.
Because we all know Bethesda
was purchased for their FPS catalog, ABK
didn't fall into their hands in a once in a lifetime and never-thought-possible deal, Halo
wasn't kept while splitting from Bungie because it was their biggest IP and one of the most popular ones in the world, and because Game Pass growth and dominance
isn't their main goal in the past 5+ years. Source: talesfrommyass and justtrustmebro.
The significance is their inability to generate IP reflects unfavourably on their capability for stewardship of these proven successes. Basically handing control of the best vehicles to a mediocre driver is not good for competition.
Generating IP has absolutely zero bearing on regulatory procedure and guidelines, and even if it were in your fanboy ideology of the approval process, lawyers would just prove,
factually, that new IP have been generated. To which you would pull out your GameFaqs list warzzz spreadsheet and attempt to move the goalposts.
Trying to deflect with a hypothetical Sony purchase of SE is transparently fake. Not to mention wildly inappropriate based on the market capitalization of the two publishers.
Your "impartiality" is incredibly transparent. You got caught with receipts saying Sony should acquire SE, which went against your point, hence it being mentioned. Thats not deflection, but proof of blatant hypocrisy and partiality. The "SE vs ABK market capitalization" is a weak strawman typically presented by rats being hypocrites. Let me ask you, when you said Sony should lockdown SE, From Software, Bandai Namco and "get some preferential treatment arrangement" from Capcom, does that move the needle from your goalpost? Let me guess,
no, because ABK is still bigger market wise, amirite? Right.
Try again fanboy. You just got destroyed.
I'm sure you'd like to think that, but that's not how this works. Just like you like to think seasoned, impartial M&A lawyers not involved in any side of the acquisition or publishers
actually involved in the acquisition are irrelevant and don't know what they're talking about because *
checks notes* you say so.
) at least (y'know, using the "+" sign and all) that your know more than everyone else, including publishers that have been around longer than that.
