• 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.

Microsoft / Activision Deal Approval Watch |OT| (MS/ABK close)

Do you believe the deal will be approved?


  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Varteras

Member
Her son did just recently get a job at MS. I expect his career to be fasttracked very soon.

I'm mindblown how that is not considered a conflict of interest. Her son working for the company she has to make a judgement on absolutely constitutes a compromised case. Although, I do wonder if such a thing could actually influence her in the opposite direction. She has to know that a favorable ruling to Microsoft would call her integrity into question. This is odd
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
I love how these so called professionals are so quick to defend Xbox and Microsoft; they don’t want to lose their privileges:



When did PlayStation cancel the Xbox version of Spider-Man?

No it's not. John. Mavel was shopping for an exclusive suitor. Lucasfilm/Disney were initially 3rd party until the buyout and contract restructure (i.e. moneyhat Xbox fantards liked to use up until all of this shit is coming out).

And Gavin is no professional anything other than a fantard shill as well. He was laughed off this forum with his "studio" one man guy making an Indie game when he tried to propagate FUD about the PS5 in the next gen tech OT.

"Notice me master senpai MS"
 
Last edited:

Thirty7ven

Banned
Not a fan of the government recently, but I gotta say FTC is doing a damn fine job with this.

Cant believe they had all the receipts and several countries OK'd the deal. Even CMA was like they dont think COD would go exclusive. Like, dude, its all right here. MS is literally lying to your face.

If this deal is blocked thanks to the FTC then we can safely say that the U.S would have effectively saved this industry from a monopoly. Worse, an MS monopoly which if the last ten years of xbox are any indication would've been a fucking disaster.

It was there all along, MS has been playing loopholes and lobbying all this way along with lying to the public.

At this point you have to be a liar or a retard to not see it for what it is. This merger should be illegal. It’s extremely anti competitive.
 

GHG

Gold Member
I love how these so called professionals are so quick to defend Xbox and Microsoft; they don’t want to lose their privileges:



When did PlayStation cancel the Xbox version of Spider-Man?


They finally got to John.

Sad Feelings GIF
 

Darsxx82

Member
No, incorrect, those deals preceded the contracts with Sony - MS is being accused, not Zenimax. The difference in the Indiana Jones deal is likely they asked Disney to amend it and likely paid them a large sum of money to exclude a platform.

That's why they're using new games as accusatory cases against them because MS had a say and guided them towards exclusivity for all new titles while claiming "case-by-case" when, so far, there is no single case yet that includes a new game that is on PS.
That's your guess. The most likely possibility is that MS promised Disney to increase the size and production values of the game compared to what would be only with the funds of Zenimax and that would be more interesting.

Then, "case by case" means that, that MS has the power to decide. Among other reasons because the acquisition of Zenimax was made without conditions.

The need of the FTC is to demonstrate that MS is going to make COD exclusive and for that it must prove it with real and quantifiable evidence and not only with assumptions. That all regulators have ruled out console florlosure should tell you a lot.
 

solidus12

Member
No it's not. John. Mavel was shopping for an exclusive suitor. Lucasfilm/Disney were initially 3rd party until the buyout and contract restructure (i.e. moneyhat Xbox fantards liked to use up until all of this shit is coming out).

And Gavin is no professional anything other than a fantard shill as well. He was laughed off this forum with his "studio" one man guy making an Indie game when he tried to propagate FUD about the PS5 in the next gen tech OT.

"Notice me master senpai MS"
Is he implying that Sony canceled an Xbox version of Spider-Man?
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
I'm mindblown how that is not considered a conflict of interest. Her son working for the company she has to make a judgement on absolutely constitutes a compromised case. Although, I do wonder if such a thing could actually influence her in the opposite direction. She has to know that a favorable ruling to Microsoft would call her integrity into question. This is odd
charles-reese-welcome-to-america.gif
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
The need of the FTC is to demonstrate that MS is going to make COD exclusive and for that it must prove it with real and quantifiable evidence and not only with assumptions. That all regulators have ruled out console florlosure should tell you a lot.

Basically this, for all of its other concerns, even the CMA said they do not believe in CoD foreclosure from PS.

Ideally the FTC case should end with the same decision.
 

xHunter

Member
No it's not. John. Mavel was shopping for an exclusive suitor. Lucasfilm/Disney were initially 3rd party until the buyout and contract restructure (i.e. moneyhat Xbox fantards liked to use up until all of this shit is coming out).

And Gavin is no professional anything other than a fantard shill as well. He was laughed off this forum with his "studio" one man guy making an Indie game when he tried to propagate FUD about the PS5 in the next gen tech OT.

"Notice me master senpai MS"
Ah i remember him. He was that weird bird guy. Didnt he also burn his PS5 to spread more FUD?
 

tmlDan

Member
That's your guess. The most likely possibility is that MS promised Disney to increase the size and production values of the game compared to what would be only with the funds of Zenimax and that would be more interesting.

Then, "case by case" means that, that MS has the power to decide. Among other reasons because the acquisition of Zenimax was made without conditions.

The need of the FTC is to demonstrate that MS is going to make COD exclusive and for that it must prove it with real and quantifiable evidence and not only with assumptions. That all regulators have ruled out console florlosure should tell you a lot.
what, it's not a guess, that's how businesses work. You're making up a size and production value proposition that does not benefit Disney in the way you think, that will never bridge the gap of releasing on PS (the largest platform it would release on)

It's all exchange through benefits, almost primarily monetary. Have you ever worked for/with big companies?
 

Topher

Identifies as young
Basically this, for all of its other concerns, even the CMA said they do not believe in CoD foreclosure from PS.

Ideally the FTC case should end with the same decision.

I imagine that's exactly how it will end. All that shit revealed is worth it all by itself. lol
 

vj27

Banned
Lol I found the stream on YouTube. Thought that was illegal or something. It’s on Sarah Bond right now and they’re asking on how to buy games in gamepass lol.

Is that what it is live for the zoom call? Curious to see if this is delayed or something.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I guess not shocking to anyone but MS expects next Xbox and PS in 2028. But I can absolutely see Sony coming with a Pro in the meantime.

Honestly, 2028 feels too soon considering it's already 2023 and we've JUST started leaving the cross-gen window in some prominent releases.
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
I love how these so called professionals are so quick to defend Xbox and Microsoft; they don’t want to lose their privileges:



When did PlayStation cancel the Xbox version of Spider-Man?

I'm so glad I've stopped giving Digital Foundry and Eurogamer my views and clicks. I don't want to support biased shills so they get bigger and sell their souls to get insider exclusive access by corporations.
 

Darsxx82

Member
what, it's not a guess, that's how businesses work. You're making up a size and production value proposition that does not benefit Disney in the way you think, that will never bridge the gap of releasing on PS (the largest platform it would release on)

It's all exchange through benefits, almost primarily monetary. Have you ever worked for/with big companies?
On the contrary, the business does not work in only one way. For Disney it can be perfectly more interesting an Indiana Jones game with more budget, production values and means financed by MS than a multiplatform game with lower production values and that devalue the IP and that passes without pain or glory in sales. In fact, that was Pete Hinnes' response at the end of his speech. Therefore, only bet on your part.
 

vj27

Banned
bro why is the FTC just asking the most basic questions. I have no idea what they are aiming to accomplish this with. Is this the part they try to say gamepass users = cloud users? I don’t know what else they can be arguing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom