• 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.


It's one thing I haven't understood.... Minecraft also has no XSeries version. I do not understand how P. Spencer has not clarified such a thing.


Leave it to John to basically reduce it to a whataboutism. MS withholding a PS5 optimized version of Minecraft from PS5 out of spite does not immediately correlate to them having plans for an optimized version for Series X/S.

I mean just look at how they handled the Xbox port of Ghostwire Tokyo compared to PS5; for whatever reason, MS did not afford Zenimax/Tango the means of making that version at least as performant as the PS5 one, which ran better, had much better RT, and other benefits despite being older and on a platform MS does not own.

Is John even trying to use his brain with some of these tweets or just saying whatever he can to look like he's in MS's corner during this trail? DF fell off pretty hard these past few weeks :/
 
Last edited:

xHunter

Member
Now this is some spin
Dance Dancing GIF by AFV Pets
Sony blocking MS from releasing games on their own platform confirmed. Heard it here first.
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
FTC defending this pretty badly, if I were the lawyer my points would be pretty clear:
  1. MS is trying to buy the biggest games
  2. Biggest games have an anchor effect (system sellers
  3. MS wants to make those games exclusives to GP (emails, latest bethesda releases)
  4. MS is currently dumping the competition with GP offering a price way below the cost
  5. When MS is sucesfull at gaining market control, they will act like always (azure, o365) and pass the cost to consumer -> huge raise of GP price + less benefits.
The only way out of here is Valve trying to make a stand but I think they are still happy with their position. Sony just doesn't have the financial capability to try to fight this, they would be better off becoming a third party.
Those would be akin to accusations. FTC is currently establishing motivation and precedence.
 

GHG

Gold Member
FTC defending this pretty badly, if I were the lawyer my points would be pretty clear:
  1. MS is trying to buy the biggest games
  2. Biggest games have an anchor effect (system sellers)
  3. MS wants to make those games exclusives to GP (emails, latest bethesda releases)
  4. MS is currently dumping the competition with GP offering a price way below the cost
  5. When MS is sucesfull at gaining market control, they will act like always (azure, o365) and pass the cost to consumer -> huge raise of GP price + less benefits.
The only way out of here is Valve trying to make a stand but I think they are still happy with their position. Sony just doesn't have the financial capability to try to fight this, they would be better off becoming a third party.

Discovery phase my man.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
FTC defending this pretty badly, if I were the lawyer my points would be pretty clear:
  1. MS is trying to buy the biggest games
  2. Biggest games have an anchor effect (system sellers)
  3. MS wants to make those games exclusives to GP (emails, latest bethesda releases)
  4. MS is currently dumping the competition with GP offering a price way below the cost
  5. When MS is sucesfull at gaining market control, they will act like always (azure, o365) and pass the cost to consumer -> huge raise of GP price + less benefits.
The only way out of here is Valve trying to make a stand but I think they are still happy with their position. Sony just doesn't have the financial capability to try to fight this, they would be better off becoming a third party.

Proving full foreclosure when other major regulators have dismissed it, that is the hard part.
 
Proving full foreclosure when other major regulators have dismissed it, that is the hard part.

I don't think that's what the FTC have to actually prove. Just that MS could have motivating reasons to leverage acquired ABK content in anticompetitive ways.

Partial foreclosure could still be achieved via anticompetitive actions, which would be enough for the FTC here, IIRC.
 

Thirty7ven

Banned
Proving full foreclosure when other major regulators have dismissed it, that is the hard part.

Lie

Regulators have not dismissed foreclosure, they have said it can happen but it will hurt MS's bottom line and that they don't have a financial incentive to do so even if they might have a strategic incentive to do so. Even if they do, in the markets those regulators operate in, it was concluded that it wouldn't have a sufficiently significant impact on competition.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Lie

Regulators have not dismissed foreclosure, they have said it can happen but it will hurt MS's bottom line and that they don't have a financial incentive to do so even if they might have a strategic incentive to do so. Even if they do, in the markets those regulators operate in, it was concluded that it wouldn't have a sufficiently significant impact on competition.

aka both CMA and EU have dismissed the concern of full disclosure on MS's part, for whatever reason. I don't know why that needs this much clarification.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom