Support NeoGAF

[Crayon]

It's a reference to an account suicide, it's not meant to be used seriously

Damn, sounds like a good one lol.

 

[GhostOfTsu]

This green rats thing is weird because I've never seen a place that has a pet name for just xb fanboys but not ps ones. Or vice versa. Shouldn't they come in pairs? Xbots and sony ponies?

I like Sony Pony. The Ponies

It's frowned upon here to use xbots so we have to use green rats

 

[Walter Matthau]

 

[Crayon]

I like Sony Pony. The Ponies

It's frowned upon here to use xbots so we have to use green rats

 

[adamsapple]

That's not a valid argument since a stipulation for the Bungie acquisition was they they remain multi-platform. And it was already confirmed that Call of Duty would only stay multi-platform for three years.

Three years beyond the current agreements. Not just three years. So it could be 3, 5, 6 or more years, we don't know how long the pre-existing agreements last.

And there was no statement made that there would not be any further negotiations beyond that.

Minecraft is still on PS platforms, and gets updated, isn't it ?

It's probably a handshake agreement between the two companies. Jim's recent blase statements might put a crack that kind of handshake agreements tho.

 

[Brigandier]

Sony has been acquiring studios unchecked since Sega dropped out of the hardware business and collected all of their monopoly cards. Why is it suddenly a problem when MS acquires a studio, because of its size? The sum of Sony's acquired studios over time far exceeds this one time purchase.

It's suddenly a problem when companies acquire publishers who have many studios and a truck load of IP under their umbrella.

There's an enormous difference between acquiring a studio with 1-10 ip and acquiring a publisher with potentially 100s.

It's absolutely anti consumer and is definitely anti competitive.

I'm against moneyhatting exclusives like FF on PS etc which sucks but I'm totally 100% against random huge ass acquisitions that are clearly to force people to leave one platform to go to theirs by acquiring vast amounts of IP with one of them being the most popular console game on the planet.

 

[IFireflyl]

Three years beyond the current agreements. Not just three years. So it could be 3, 5, 6 or more years, we don't know how long the pre-existing agreements last.

And there was no statement made that there would not be any further negotiations beyond that.

Minecraft is still on PS platforms, and gets updated, isn't it ?

It's probably a handshake agreement between the two companies. Jim's recent blase statements might put a crack that kind of handshake agreements tho.

Minecraft isn't in the same vein as Call of Duty. In 2021 Minecraft made less than $350 million across all platforms combined. By contrast, Call of Duty made over $1.8 billion from Sony alone in 2021. Comparing those two titles is kind of nuts. I here what you're saying about multi-platform potentially being renegotiated, but the problem with that is the word "potentially". Take this quote from Microsoft:

“Regardless of how unsurprising Sony‘s criticism of content exclusivity is – given that PlayStation’s entire strategy has been centred on exclusivity over the years – the reality is that the strategy of retaining Activision Blizzard’s games by not distributing them in rival console shops would simply not be profitable for Microsoft,”

“Such a strategy would be profitable only if Activision Blizzard’s games were able to attract a sufficiently large number of gamers to the Xbox console ecosystem, and if Microsoft could earn enough revenue from game sales to offset the losses from not distributing such games on rival consoles.”

Source: https://www.videogameschronicle.com...ofitable-to-make-call-of-duty-xbox-exclusive/

That second paragraph can be read to say that exclusivity isn't promised, and if they increase their users by enough then they can move to being Xbox exclusive. What has Microsoft ever done to make you think they don't want this to be exclusive? The first they they did with their Zenimax acquisition was confirm to everyone that Sony isn't touching future Bethesda games.

Acting like Microsoft wants to keep the Activision/Blizzard games multi-platform is, to me, ridiculously silly. If they are allowed to make Activision/Blizzard games Microsoft exclusives, they will make bank. World of Warcraft expanding to the Xbox. Call of Duty, Diablo, and StarCraft only on Xbox. The money would print itself, and there is no way that a game like Call of Duty wouldn't be a major system seller for the next console generation (which is about when the multi-platform agreement would expire). Call of Duty has over 100,000,000 monthly players. Around 42% of those are on PlayStation, and around 25% of those are on Xbox. If Call of Duty becomes a Microsoft exclusive and half of the 42% of PlayStation players switch to Xbox next generation, that's over 20 million users not spending money on Sony's platform, and making Microsoft bank.

I'm not going to pretend like I have all the answers. I promise you that I do not. I just think you're being a bit naive. But maybe I'm wrong. Time will tell.

 

[adamsapple]

Acting like Microsoft wants to keep the Activision/Blizzard games multi-platform is, to me, ridiculously silly.

I don't think the deal extends to all games, the primary focus is Call of Duty since that is the big high profile name.

And like I've said elsewhere before, I don't think MS will ever really take it completely off of PS platforms if this deal completes. Like they said before, they offered 3 years on top of the agreements, again that is anywhere from half a decade to almost a full decade. There is plenty of time enough in the middle for both companies to do further negotiations about it.

 

[IFireflyl]

I don't think the deal extends to all games, the primary focus is Call of Duty since that is the big high profile name.

And like I've said elsewhere before, I don't think MS will ever really take it completely off of PS platforms if this deal completes. Like they said before, they offered 3 years on top of the agreements, again that is anywhere from half a decade to almost a full decade. There is plenty of time enough in the middle for both companies to do further negotiations about it.

I hear you, but I will respectfully disagree. Nothing in Microsoft's history leads me to believe they are willingly going to remain multi-platform. If this acquisition goes through Sony won't be able to renegotiate down the line. Negotiation happens when neither party is in a dominant position. But Microsoft will have all of the leverage, and Sony won't have anything to bring to the table to negotiate with.

 

[modiz]

It will go through. Microsoft knew this would get scrutinized and set an expected time frame accordingly.
Once EU and FTC approve the others will follow.

 

[sinnergy]

Don’t read to much into stuff you don’t understand

 

[Team Andromeda]

Like MS gives a toss about sales in New Zealand even if it was the I think the territory where the OG sold best in.
The deal is all but done, I look forward to all the COD games on Gamepass next year.

 

[Leyasu]

Sony fanboys out in force on the first page.

“Help us worldwide regulators, you’re our only hope “

 

[anthony2690]

Notice that I did not sell when it was in the triple digits last year. Are you still proud of your foolish father my son?

If this deal goes through dad! I know you'll surely be smart enough to sell then! (As I can't imagine it will ever reach them highs again, howcome you nev it sold when it was in the triple digits?)
It's my birthday on the 26th, you have 32 years to make up for haha

If only I was a real broker.

Really curious what made you get shares in Activision in the first place?

 

[Azurro]

Sony has been acquiring studios unchecked since Sega dropped out of the hardware business and collected all of their monopoly cards. Why is it suddenly a problem when MS acquires a studio, because of its size? The sum of Sony's acquired studios over time far exceeds this one time purchase.

This is a huge publisher that MS is acquiring, not the much, much smaller studios that Sony have acquired, some of them they have working years with prior to the acquisition. It has enormous market implications, given all new Blizzard and Activision games will be exclusive to their platform.

 

[modiz]

This is a huge publisher that MS is acquiring, not the much, much smaller studios that Sony have acquired, some of them they have working years with prior to the acquisition. It has enormous market implications, given all new Blizzard and Activision games will be exclusive to their platform.

First of all, these games will remain multi-platform. Some of them will not make it to Playstation eventually but they will be available on PC, for example.

 

[Yoboman]

First of all, these games will remain multi-platform. Some of them will not make it to Playstation eventually but they will be available on PC, for example.

Oh you mean they won't come to the platform that MS doesn't have a stake in?

Will it be excluded from Mac as well? Or is this whole purchase specifically to exclude one competitor?

 

[Negotiator101]

https://pledgetimes.com/microsoft-a...nd-new-zealand-postpone-acquisition-verdicts/



So for New Zealand, this is the third postponement on an approval decision on the acquisition. Extending the investigation for unknown reasons until November 11th.

But for Australia that are postponing because NEW information has come from Microsoft, whether it's directly from Microsoft, or more information had come out about Microsoft causing them to freeze the approval process is unclear, because if it came from Microsoft they would likely have went down the path of approval unless Microsoft gave them information which may work against the, but Microsoft has clever PR and attorneys so I doubt that entirely.

What's interesting about he Australian one is they were supposed to reveal the decision on the 15th, late next week. The fact they are announcing a delay pending review makes me think that something is wrong. They only made the delay announcement a few hours ago so they must have received last minute information that caused them to move the date. We don't know if it's good or bad though, but given the delay I lean on the latter.

It is possible Australia communicated with nearby New Zealand with what they found, resulting in their extension as well. New Zealand has already extended their previous investigation to today's date sept 9th, but have now went further to November 11th. Very concerning since Microsoft was hoping to get this deal done quick, many red flags are showing up and now I'm starting to wonder if the deal will go through at all.

Oh Eddie how are you so nieve? This was never expected to go through till next year so its not an issue, also on the basis of new information they are duty bound to investigate regardless of its importance.

 

[Hendrick's]

Try again.

All the information you seek is publically available. The EU are significantly more stringent with their requirements.

Literally a couple of days ago:

European Union blocks merger of US firms in cancer screening sector

The European Union's anti-trust watchdog announced on Tuesday that it is blocking the buyout of cancer-screening company GRAIL by biotech giant Illumina in a rare move by European regulators against two US companies.

wap.business-standard.com

If you want to delude yourself into thinking that the FTC approving something means everyone else will then be my guest. Fantasy is free.

Poor example for your argument. That company broke the rules and closed the deal before getting approval. Think that may have swayed them to block it?

 

[Azurro]

First of all, these games will remain multi-platform. Some of them will not make it to Playstation eventually but they will be available on PC, for example.

They are still controlled by MS and they get to greatly influence the market through the exclusivity of these IP. This is monopolistic behaviour, which is why this is bad for the market and why regulators are looking into this. This is wider than just going "HAHA" to Sony ponies, though a lot of people don't seem to have the maturity to see it.

 

[Three]

lol New information from microsoft... what could it be? Information on their liaisons with columbian hookers?

Sounds to me like they were going to reject it and MS was like hold up a second and offered some new numbers and quotes from industry analysts saying it wont create a monopoly. I dont see why MS will offer information that would delay a positive ruling.

Yes it's very likely they had concerns and asked for information or new proposals and they are awaiting those from MS.

 

[Kagey K]

Really curious what made you get shares in Activision in the first place?

It doesnt really matter. It has a 95.00 buyout when completed.

All the people sleeping on this are missing fat gains.

Easiest 20.00 made per stock ever.

 

[Hendrick's]

Sony fanboys out in force on the first page.

Cryin' Lyin' Jim Ryan has mobilized the troops.

 

[PaintTinJr]

They are still controlled by MS and they get to greatly influence the market through the exclusivity of these IP. This is monopolistic behaviour, which is why this is bad for the market and why regulators are looking into this. This is wider than just going "HAHA" to Sony ponies, though a lot of people don't seem to have the maturity to see it.

I think what makes this deal particularly different is that Sony couldn't afford to buy this company -even at a stretch - and the size of the company's player base across all markets is greater than the size of PlayStation and Xbox combined IIRC. I think someone on here said CoD had lost more players recently than Xbox has ever sold consoles in a single generation, and yet CoD is still massively popular.

I think with Zenimax probably being at the upper limit of what Sony could have afforded and the revenue generated from any one annual title being a lot less the scrutiny wasn't as strict. PlayStation's first party games could easily compete with any Zenimax studio output, whereas the top annual FPS games are a different animal IMO.

/edit
As a point of perspective about the deal in relation to it moving the chairs in the industry If we considered Xbox as a separate business from Microsoft, Activision could likely afford to acquire that business quite easily, but by contrast PlayStation would be out of their league in all likelihood, which sort of shows the potential market share Microsoft buying Activision is getting them if they aren't under any concessions to preserve the multi-platform nature of their biggest current titles.

 

[GHG]

How many mergers approved in US were rejected abroad? Do we know of any major ones?

I always thought this was a formality. No idea why this is even taking this long. Since when did these people start giving a shit about the gaming industry?

Dude, it's an 70 billion dollar merger between two of the largest companies in the world and you expect everyone to just bend over and say "yeh go ahead, we won't investigate anything about this"?

The EU have a habit of blocking a lot more things than the US do, it's just the way they are. I'm not the biggest fan of the EU and what they stand for in general because I think they get too involved in too many things (nanny state) but they are known for being aa lot more thorough in their M&A investigations.

Poor example for your argument. That company broke the rules and closed the deal before getting approval. Think that may have swayed them to block it?

Wasn't in reasoning for blocking it, you can read the full verdict here:

Mergers: Commission prohibits acquisition of GRAIL by Illumina

The European Commission has prohibited, under the EU Merger Regulation, the implemented acquisition of GRAIL by Illumina. The merger would have stifled innovation, and reduced choice in the emerging market for blood-based early cancer detection tests.

ec.europa.eu

 

[Hendrick's]

Wasn't in reasoning for blocking it, you can read the full verdict here:

Mergers: Commission prohibits acquisition of GRAIL by Illumina

The European Commission has prohibited, under the EU Merger Regulation, the implemented acquisition of GRAIL by Illumina. The merger would have stifled innovation, and reduced choice in the emerging market for blood-based early cancer detection tests.

ec.europa.eu

From the article you posted.

Illumina appears to have broken EU merger rules by completing the buyout before the commission cleared the move.

This is unheard of. Companies abide by our rules. They require them to not implement a merger before they have been notified and cleared by the commission, she told reporters in Brussels.

Of course this impacted the decision. Regulators don't like to be blown off.

 

[Bernd Lauert]

The CMA report also says:








Just about anyone will read the above will come to the same conclusion that the CMA are first and foremost looking out for Sony's best interest here. Hence they're getting clowned by pretty much every blue check on twitter relating to how utterly biased their summary sounds.

I never read those parts. They sound as if Sony lawyers wrote them. What a clown show

 

[modiz]

Oh you mean they won't come to the platform that MS doesn't have a stake in?

Will it be excluded from Mac as well? Or is this whole purchase specifically to exclude one competitor?

It's to exclude the platform that was singing the "exclusives are the most important song" abc that doesn't offer gamepass.

 

[modiz]

They are still controlled by MS and they get to greatly influence the market through the exclusivity of these IP. This is monopolistic behaviour, which is why this is bad for the market and why regulators are looking into this. This is wider than just going "HAHA" to Sony ponies, though a lot of people don't seem to have the maturity to see it.

How does Microsoft control Steam?

 

[Three]

How does Microsoft control Steam?

Why do you think the CMA and UK government mention OS?

 

[Yoboman]

It's to exclude the platform that was singing the "exclusives are the most important song" abc that doesn't offer gamepass.

Gee you guys try so hard to talk around the issue

Just say MS want exclusives and are willing to buy out the competition to do so. You seem to need so badly for MS to seem like the good guys

Back in reality they are correcting a major weakness and have gotten dirty to do it. It's not a good thing for the industry, just for MS

 

[Valedix]

the perfect loop

 

[Darsxx82]

The CMA report also says:








Just about anyone will read the above will come to the same conclusion that the CMA are first and foremost looking out for Sony's best interest here. Hence they're getting clowned by pretty much every blue check on twitter relating to how utterly biased their summary sounds.

I already highlighted it at the time it was published. It's blatantly like it was written by Jim Ryan.

Already talking about XBOX leading the market at the height of Sony is an example of not knowing reality.

Absurdly, he does not look at the interests of other third parties at any time, such as the workers of Act-Blz (which should be the priority). It does not look at or mention the interests of the consumer. It does not look at the reality of Sony's dominant position in the market and how it manages to abuse it to obtain agreements and even abuse its own users and consumers by dictating price increases at will and interest, knowing that it will not have adverse effects. ..

They are so brazen that they even exemplify the exclusivity of Starfield, as if they were unaware that precisely Sony was close to buying its exclusivity and that Zenimax was not a listed company. They only cares about whether the exclusivity of COD will reduce profits and users to Sony or if a supposed success of the subscription business could give Xbox an advantage.
They absurdly doesn't even care about the consequences for Nintendo. A company that has had to reinvent itself to be successful precisely because of the impossibility of dealing with the quasi-monopoly situation that Sony exercises in the console market...

MS has it very easy to respond to such assertions just by showing examples of the reality of the market and Sony's practices to maintain its influence and leadership position in the console market. Something that incomprehensibly seems not to be among his "concerns"

 

[Clear]

You can't really point the finger at Sony when they don't have a track record of $70b mergers/acquisitions!

Please. Stop trying to draw equivalences when the sheer scale of this deal is what makes it especially significant in a regulatory sense. If this isn't examined thoroughly what's to stop any of the other tech giants from doing the exact same thing on an even larger scale? Because for Apple, Google, Amazon, etc. If they had the desire, they have more than enough cash to make moves of their own.

 

[Panajev2001a]

You can't really point the finger at Sony when they don't have a track record of $70b mergers/acquisitions!

Please. Stop trying to draw equivalences when the sheer scale of this deal is what makes it especially significant in a regulatory sense. If this isn't examined thoroughly what's to stop any of the other tech giants from doing the exact same thing on an even larger scale? Because for Apple, Google, Amazon, etc. If they had the desire, they have more than enough cash to make moves of their own.

This comes right after they bought Zenimax and proceeded to lock down their next catalogue after giving the same initial speech to appease the regulators.

 

[Panajev2001a]

I already highlighted it at the time it was published. It's blatantly like it was written by Jim Ryan.

.

Already talking about XBOX leading the market at the height of Sony is an example of not knowing reality.

Really? Or is it about not having a shortsighted look and taking Good Guy Phil’s words at face value but the actions they make and how much you want to trust a few Trillions $ corporation once they have the cards in their favour? I know GamePass is a good value for some and the idea to have more games for cheap feels good, but that is not the only concern here.

Absurdly, he does not look at the interests of other third parties at any time, such as the workers of Act-Blz (which should be the priority).

Oh please, this reads a bit disingenuous, like a post throwing every possible argument at the wall to see what sticks… sure, for the workers.

It does not look at or mention the interests of the consumer.

Yes it does, consumers != just the people looking at GamePass today and wanting more games for the cheap nor people that would love Sony to go third party either .

It does not look at the reality of Sony's dominant position in the market and how it manages to abuse it to obtain agreements and even abuse its own users and consumers by dictating price increases at will and interest, knowing that it will not have adverse effects. ..

They are so brazen that they even exemplify the exclusivity of Starfield, as if they were unaware that precisely Sony was close to buying its exclusivity and that Zenimax was not a listed company.

Timed exclusivity vs full unlimited exclusivity just after announcing your were not buying the publisher to restrict access to these games for PS users… sure…

Anyways…Rumors and speculations of a much smaller overall company doing the same thing as a company convinced and fined multiple times for abusing their dominant market share to gain leverage in other markets… but sure, do not let false equivalences stop you.

MS has it very easy to respond to such assertions just by showing examples of the reality of the market and Sony's practices to maintain its influence and leadership position in the console market. Something that incomprehensibly seems not to be among his "concerns"

Sure, more false equivalences. Just be honest and go with “why should not a rich company use its money to kill off others” it is not like you are driving a train of thought much different than that anyways. Just makes it more fun when not in first place people talk about being pro market competition and all that .

 

[Three]

I already highlighted it at the time it was published. It's blatantly like it was written by Jim Ryan.

Already talking about XBOX leading the market at the height of Sony is an example of not knowing reality.

Absurdly, he does not look at the interests of other third parties at any time, such as the workers of Act-Blz (which should be the priority). It does not look at or mention the interests of the consumer. It does not look at the reality of Sony's dominant position in the market and how it manages to abuse it to obtain agreements and even abuse its own users and consumers by dictating price increases at will and interest, knowing that it will not have adverse effects. ..

They are so brazen that they even exemplify the exclusivity of Starfield, as if they were unaware that precisely Sony was close to buying its exclusivity and that Zenimax was not a listed company. They only cares about whether the exclusivity of COD will reduce profits and users to Sony or if a supposed success of the subscription business could give Xbox an advantage.
They absurdly doesn't even care about the consequences for Nintendo. A company that has had to reinvent itself to be successful precisely because of the impossibility of dealing with the quasi-monopoly situation that Sony exercises in the console market...

MS has it very easy to respond to such assertions just by showing examples of the reality of the market and Sony's practices to maintain its influence and leadership position in the console market. Something that incomprehensibly seems not to be among his "concerns"

What's absurd is suggesting the CMA isn't looking at the interest of consumers. What's even more absurd is you suggesting that the CMA should be concerned about inflation/exchange rate price increases instead. Do you know what predatory pricing is even? You have no knowledge about competition law.

 

[RoboFu]

Seems like Someone’s throwing money around to cause these blocks under the guise of “bad for SOCIETY” .. almost as if someone has a FUND set up.. a SOCIAL JUSTICE fund.,,

 

[modiz]

Gee you guys try so hard to talk around the issue

Just say MS want exclusives and are willing to buy out the competition to do so. You seem to need so badly for MS to seem like the good guys

Back in reality they are correcting a major weakness and have gotten dirty to do it. It's not a good thing for the industry, just for MS

There's no good guy. There's only companies trying to get our money. If you think it's dirty to use money the other one can't then that's fair.
If it's bad for the industry, we will see. Right now it's only bad for Sony which are only one piece of the industry.

 

[modiz]

Just be honest and go with “why should not a rich company use its money to kill off others” it is not like you are driving a train of thought much different than that anyways. Just makes it more fun when not in first place people talk about being pro market competition and all that .

Didn't Sony have way more money than Sega in the 90's?

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Didn't Sony have way more money than Sega in the 90's?

Sony's money isn't what killed Sega

 

[modiz]

Sony's money isn't what killed Sega

Not completely, I agree, but they still signed exclusivity deals and used their money right from the start.

 

[Three]

Didn't Sony have way more money than Sega in the 90's?

Sure, I guess, but did it buy up EA, and Ubisoft when it was one of the richest tech companies in the 90s?

Not completely, I agree, but they still signed exclusivity deals and used their money right from the start.

Which ones? Ironically Sega signed Tomb raider exclusivity for 6 weeks. Still nobody bought the Saturn.

 

[Azurro]

Didn't Sony have way more money than Sega in the 90's?

The market killed off Sega. More specifically, Sega's moves in the market killed their position in it, Sony had very little to do with it. MS with all of its resources isn't able to effectively compete with Sony, so it's resorting to buying up the market. This is why market regulations exist, it's not ok.

 

[DavidGzz]

Gee you guys try so hard to talk around the issue

Just say MS want exclusives and are willing to buy out the competition to do so. You seem to need so badly for MS to seem like the good guys

Back in reality they are correcting a major weakness and have gotten dirty to do it. It's not a good thing for the industry, just for MS

Did you not see the huge list of the studios that Sony bought over the years and do you think if they could they wouldn't have bought Activision Blizzard first? I have Game Pass so I see it as a good thing. Can it get out of control being a bad thing for competition eventually? Maybe. But it's just videogames so I don't take it so seriously.

If Sony's PS6 gets Dreamcasted, another will take it's place. Yawn.

 

[modiz]

Why do you think the CMA and UK government mention OS?

Yeah, explain it to me.

If you want, you can grab your Steam Deck, running Linux, open Steam, buy an Xbox game on Steam, and play, without ever touching Windows.
If you want, you can grab your Steam Deck, running Linux, go to your browser, sub to Game Pass, and use xcloud to play hundreds of games, without ever touching Windows.
If you want, you can grab your phone, running Android, download the gamepass app, sub to Game Pass, and use xcloud to play hundreds of games, without ever touching Windows.
If you want, you can grab your iphone, running iOS, open Safari, sub to Game Pass, and use xcloud to play hundreds of games, without ever touching Windows.

 

[modiz]

Did you not see the huge list of the studios that Sony bought over the years and do you think if they could they wouldn't have bought Activision Blizzard first? I have Game Pass so I see it as a good thing. Can it get out of control being a bad thing for competition eventually? Maybe. But it's just videogames so I don't take it so seriously.

If Sony's PS6 gets Dreamcasted, another will take it's place. Yawn.

People don't care for the "gaming market" as a whole on neogaf, that is a straw man. They care for their precious corporation that only wants their money.

 

[Three]

Yeah, explain it to me.

If you want, you can grab your Steam Deck, running Linux, open Steam, buy an Xbox game on Steam, and play, without ever touching Windows.
If you want, you can grab your Steam Deck, running Linux, go to your browser, sub to Game Pass, and use xcloud to play hundreds of games, without ever touching Windows.
If you want, you can grab your phone, running Android, download the gamepass app, sub to Game Pass, and use xcloud to play hundreds of games, without ever touching Windows.
If you want, you can grab your iphone, running iOS, open Safari, sub to Game Pass, and use xcloud to play hundreds of games, without ever touching Windows.

Sure let me explain. You can't officially play a lot of Xbox game studio games on steamdeck. Here:

https://www.theverge.com/2022/3/10/22971257/microsoft-steam-deck-xbox-game-studios-list

You can however install windows on it to have proper gamepass support.
You haven't "touched windows" on android or ios but the cloud OS that the game is running on is "touching windows".

Read the press release:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/microsoft-activision-deal-could-lead-to-competition-concerns

The CMA just want to make sure that access and support for other OSs and other cloud gaming platforms are not hindered for ABK titles. They are for the consumer and only the idiot MS fanboys would have something against that.

 

[DenchDeckard]

It doesnt really matter. It has a 95.00 buyout when completed.

All the people sleeping on this are missing fat gains.

Easiest 20.00 made per stock ever.

so basically guaranteed?

So if I put 40 grand in....I would get a pay out at 95 dollars?

But for some reason if it did fail and not go through.....I would be stuck with the inevitable drop in share price?

I have never invested. I want to but im scared ...lol

 

[PaintTinJr]

Yeah, explain it to me.

If you want, you can grab your Steam Deck, running Linux, open Steam, buy an Xbox game on Steam, and play, without ever touching Windows.
If you want, you can grab your Steam Deck, running Linux, go to your browser, sub to Game Pass, and use xcloud to play hundreds of games, without ever touching Windows.
If you want, you can grab your phone, running Android, download the gamepass app, sub to Game Pass, and use xcloud to play hundreds of games, without ever touching Windows.
If you want, you can grab your iphone, running iOS, open Safari, sub to Game Pass, and use xcloud to play hundreds of games, without ever touching Windows.

You think SteamOS (or even linux) or steaming all together has a player base comparable to Windows?

Even those solutions still have to translate the Windows API calls and in particular the dependency on single OS API DirectX - which was the start of Xbox (direct - X - box) which seems pertinent to this topic.

So, yes you do "touch" Windows in all those situations AFAIK, and for SteamOS I suspect WINE or a successor is in use for most Windows only games. But for popular F2P games like Valorant I believe they are totally Windows only, because of the WinIntel Secure boot initiative (and win11 TPM2.0) requirement that the game requires.