PropellerEar
Member
Last edited:
-
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)
- Status
Timberwolf25
Member
Thread has become a ban dunking ground.
Can you guys create a new thread to do that please?
Can you guys create a new thread to do that please?
TheRedRiders
Member
mayham2199
Member
I honestly don't know if this is a win for MS or not. Here's what I do know. MS needs to pump out more games to GP and they need as many in house devs as possible to do that. The more people you have in house pumping out games the more profitable GP will be and the less you have to run to 3rd parties for that. I think in the end MS is winning here but I don't truly know. I'm positive this is not how they wanted all this to go and this is not the kind of deal they wanted to make.
Honestly the last few quarterly reports have been very surprising to me when it comes to Xbox. If this whole plan doesn't start producing results for them I really wonder what they will end up doing. I'm also wondering how management is going to go with so many devs. MS has not shown an ability to even properly manage the studios they have now. The next decade or so is going to be very interesting when it comes to gaming.
Last edited:
MasterCornholio
Member
Well demand that those crazy people stop creating those alts.
Timberwolf25
Member
I agree, but do it in another thread. This thread is about the ABK/MS merger.
Not that hard to understand.
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
It's a win for MS because they're going to acquire Activision Blizzard.
MasterCornholio
Member
In what thread though?
It's best to confront them where they are posting. Instead of dedicating a thread to them and giving them an incentive to obtain followers.
The last thing you want to do is put them on a pedestal.
Timberwolf25
Member
How are you confronting them if they are banned?
And I disagree, because there are many of us watching this thread about the deal and not about people celebrating a ban.
There's a general ban thread somewhere in the forum.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
and we get more day 1, and legacy, games on game pass, whilst no one else is missing out on anything.,
everyone wins
MasterCornholio
Member
You mean the ban thread where people try to bring the banned members back?
That was shut down a long time ago.
What we need to do is make them feel unwelcome here. Make them know that we won't tolerate their BS. Anyways if you have an issue with that please make it known.
D
Deleted member 848825
Unconfirmed Member
I agree. But the point being made, is that its likely not the outcome MS initially expected.
Embearded
Member
You think that Microsoft won't change the way Activision/Blizzard works?
No, not everyone wins. Microsoft wins and GP fanboys win for now.
Platform holders should stay the hell away from publishers and established IP for everyone to win.
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
Timberwolf25
Member
It off-topic for this thread that's why.
MasterCornholio
Member
Then tell them to stop posting in every thread.
splattered
Member
Not to mention the massive gain in revenue is going to help fund more projects both big and small.. as long as they can manage everything half way ok we will probably see a big increase in game output and post game support. I hope.
Gudji
Member
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Not if they want to keep raking in all that revenue.
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
They are being 'forced' to sell the cloud rights that are practically worthless currently, and have another company pay to try and make them worth something in 15 years at which point any new rights defer back to you - how isn't that a win?
The original deal should have gone through - this one is much more likely to create bad outcomes and honestly just sounds like a massive shit show for consumers if it goes ahead.
Lunnarre
Neo Member
So are all the discussions you have every time you complain about someone posting off-topic. Half of the posts on this page so far are you and another guy arguing about it.
Embearded
Member
I believe they will make changes but i cannot talk with certainty about the future of so complex organisations, truth is i know nothing on how they run, but you are also making assumptions.
What i know for certainty, is that when multiple departments get different treatment under the same command, it never goes well. You either integrate fully or split clearly.
PaintTinJr
Member
Well that depends on whether the CMA see that as once again, Microsoft subverting true competition by picking Ubisoft as their winner, with the CMA maybe saying the rights are worth closer to the whole value of ATVI - given they could literally kill all B2P earnings and all the library of IPs value in ATVI if used aggressively as a loss leader by a company of Microsoft's means - and then the CMA said they needed divested - fully worldwide - to a true competitor like Tencent or Apple that wouldn't give them a sweet deal, in the same way ATVI currently refuse to.
Ar¢tos
Member
The right question is "Won't Activision/Blizzard change the way they work after being acquired by MS?"
With MS 3 trillion backing, GP cutting direct sales, less pressure for sales profit I can see a lot of management people start slacking after the acquisition.
Vognerful
Member
A couple of their main objectives are still intact and are unaffected.
Acquire ABK
Own CoD and keep it multiplatform (contrary to what fans on both sides want to believe, their internal emails proved that they wanted that in the first place)
Gain huge foothold in mobile gaming with King.
Embearded
Member
No idea about slacking. GP day 1 though will surely have an impact on the budget allocation. There is no way in hell GP income can cover AAA development of today's standards.
mayham2199
Member
Jim Ryan seemed to think their biggest issue would be retaining people and managing the whole thing that it would just be a nightmare. Sony has done a lot of acquisitions themselves so I think they would have a good idea of what the main issues will be. It's also probably why they are slow and careful about their acquisitions because they know it all comes down to people. You can have the greatest IPs in the world and the biggest devs under you but if you can't properly manage it and you can't retain the talent that was keeping it running smoothly it wont matter.
Topher
Identifies as young
Not that hard to understand that this about alts being created to be in this thread either. If you don't like a post then report it and let the mods decide. Making a big deal about folks talking about alts getting banned is just as derailing as folks talking about alts getting banned.
zapper
Member
the cma has released this document, I have not read all the paragraphs (many), they are about halfway through and it seems to me that they are still against and not convinced of the remedies proposed so far.
it seems even more messed up than before
The Pleasure
Gold Member
Rrod principal at work. For every ten 360s,there is a
SenjutsuSage
behind it championing the shit out of em.
Last edited:
Gudji
Member
TheRedRiders
Member
The Pleasure
Gold Member
mansoor1980
Gold Member
the introvert doing his thing with the CMA
Gudji
Member
Document came out today.
Schmick
Member
I think that doc is in regard to the original deal which we know is blocked.
The new deal (with the Ubisoft arrangement) has phase 1 deadline of 18 October 2023.
Microsoft / Activision Blizzard (ex-cloud streaming rights) merger inquiry
The CMA investigated the anticipated acquisition by Microsoft Corporation of Activision Blizzard, Inc. (excluding Activision Blizzard, Inc.’s non-EEA cloud streaming rights).
I might be wrong on all this though.
Edit: Also the document is titled "Microsoft/Activision Blizzard merger inquiry" whereas the new phase 1 enquiry is referenced as "Microsoft/Activision Blizzard (ex-cloud streaming rights) merger inquiry".
Last edited:
Bernardougf
Member
I went to buy a 2 million premium ferrari ... now im buying that ferrari without doors, a fucked up paint and I still have to share that damn ferrari for 15 years with the other potential buyers... but fuck me .. I bought the thing
jm89
Member
That response is for the old deal.
MS made an attempt to use these material changes to get the CMA to approve the old deal. CMA are just rejecting that.
analog_future
Resident Crybaby
Literally no one is going to give a shit that xCloud isn't going to be available or that Microsoft has multiplatform deals in place that they were intending to move forward with regardless.
D
Deleted member 848825
Unconfirmed Member
Well you could argue that the 10 year deals were also only due to the bumps in the road on the journey to get it over the finish line... a finish line which is still yet to be had.
I personally still think its a win for MS if successful. I cant believe that MS expected this many problems to complete though. We wouldn't have had moments like Brad's anti UK outburst otherwise.
Last edited by a moderator:
PaintTinJr
Member
Those paragraphs are also earlier in the document at 6. and 7., but when read in order with 5:
Yikes
"We received a number of submissions from the public and interested parties in response to our notice inviting comments on Microsoft’s MCC/SR submission, and have taken these into account as relevant"
I'm reading this as: nothing submitted helped Microsoft's argument to change our - wide reaching - remedy requirement, but information supplied by other parties was relevant and taken into account. That makes me think that the FTC info on a console SLC is back after the 10M Starfield sales on PS5 were deemed an acceptable loss for Microsoft's business strategy.
PaintTinJr
Member
Most definitely. It would pave the way for them to buy anything going forward with zero console SLC issues and most importantly to them, when both physical consoles and PCs(laptops/Desktop/ultrabooks) all get replaced by ChromeOS/PlayStation Portal devices or Smartphone/Tablets the combined library of XGS, Zenimax and ATVI all being DirectX first means that DirectX and Windows becoming the defacto graphics API(and cloud OS by dependency) is all but guaranteed.
Effectively allowing them to transfer one OS monopoly into another one by sheer scale of money, with zero impact of external competitive innovation being able to take that position of dominance from them.
Bernoulli
M2 slut
Even tho they dropped their consoles stuff for math errors they should bring it back for the FTC stuff, because it has clear emails from executives and just theories or speculations
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
PaintTinJr
Member
I've got a feeling that the CMA get the best of both worlds from a new phase 1, they probably get to keep all the previous report analyses that helps them, to let them focus just on new evidence or the changes since the beginning of this new phase 1 and the beginning of the old phase 2 - which explains the shorter timeline - meaning they can throw out anything that is no longer the current market state - which Starfield being exclusive and those emails from the FTC case evidence would certainly be relevant new evidence, and at the same time probably allows them to fully dismiss Microsoft's Dr Foschi analysis relevance as referenced in the end of that pdf.
Under those circumstances, Microsoft hopes of their new offer being a continuation dealing with an ever smaller set of things to combat might be totally misplaced, if the change of market situation and evidence possibly make it that a strong console SLC returns making it an even harder mountain to climb with the inquiry group.
Last edited:
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
Yikes
WOW!!!! This is bad.
Edited: Oh, I see this is for the original deal. Nothing to see here.
Last edited:
Unknown Soldier
Member
Microsoft's president on fresh bid for Activision Blizzard: 'Up to the regulators' to decide
Microsoft's vice-chairman and president Brad Smith told CNBC the firm "really tried to take concerns to heart" before submitting a new takeover bid for Activision Blizzard.
New interview with Brad Smith, nothing new in terms of information though. He does confirm the new deadline is October 18th so we'll probably be in hibernation for more than a month.
StealthGoblin
Banned
The issue is if future games aren’t made for PlayStation then there won’t be any trophy support or proper PSN integration. The Xbox-PlayStation deal only includes COD. So if a future Crash was to be made, it wouldn’t be made for PlayStation, wouldn’t have trophies or any support of that kind and when streamed would be really barebones.
At best for PlayStation users they’ll get the back catalogue and future CODs if Microsoft really is hell bent on making exclusive plays.
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked