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.

ToadMan

Member
What about you guys?
@GhostOfTsu Thirty7ven Thirty7ven ToadMan ToadMan

It's time for your struggle session. Tell us what consoles you own and why you're not a piece of shit in 30 seconds. GO.

Meh. I’m not interested in who games on what tbh.

There are 2 parts of this that interest me

1. The regulatory part and specifically that the regulators aren’t there for the reasons a lot of people seem to think, and

2. That MS has a well known model for their business practices. It’s so well known those same regulators have taken steps to oppose MS shenanigans more than once. I cant grasp how so few gamers seem to know their tech history. Knowing MS behavior in other sectors, any rational person would be deeply concerned with MS acquiring control of major gaming properties.

In the context of 2 - my personal tech history seems largely irrelevant.
 

KungFucius

King Snowflake
Nope. Those first 5 years don't matter at all.

By the end of the 7th generation, both Xbox and PS had a similar level of market share: 88 million (PS3) and 84 million (Xbox 360).

Microsoft lost the market share through its own stupidity: they put out an awful product that was $100 more expensive than the PS4, stopped releasing good first-party games, shut down first-party studios, forced DRM, prevented game resells, and asked people without a stable internet connection to stick with the Xbox 360.

Consequently, they lost grounds to Sony who put out a more powerful console at $100 cheaper price point with great games to boot.

Now that MS has lost the market share, it is now crying that they can't compete. That cannot be the justification for buying multiplatform games, developers, and publishers.
They did not force DRM and prevent resells. They offered that up as their initial plan, but backpedaled when people freaked out. They were going to allow users to sell digital games on a market and share some of that revenue with devs. It's really not a terrible idea compared to buying a digital title and owning it until the platform dies. It also solved the issue of needing to put the disk in the system. I would have loved to see this system expanded to something where the user can transfer the license from the disk to system and back and then be able to resell at leisure.

They did put out an inferior system last gen and failed to put out enough good games on time and that made them ignorable.
 

POKEYCLYDE

Member
It wasn't buying exclusives 3rd party games, or buying studios, or market undercutting that got Sony to start building up good will, increasing the PS3's marketshare
Ni No Kuni is 50% of the reason I bought a PS3. Journey was intriguing as well. I don't think you can definitively say what exactly gained marketshare for the PS3 and what didn't.

There's a confluence of factors that led to the PS3 gaining marketshare at the end of that generation. 1st party exclusives, 3rd party exclusives, it being a blu-ray player, the consoles price cut. To say one of these things didn't have influence is disingenuous and is pretty transparently trying to downplay what doesn't fit your argument of 'natural growth' or "the right way to be competitive".
 

sainraja

Member
And that would prove that you don't know me that well, or history. I trashed them for the whole 2nd half of 360, skipped Xbox One and only bought a Series console after they convinced me with a great E3 (bought it 3rd after Switch and PS5 first). As for the last 2 years (which is all you probably know about), I'm a satisfied customer and have enjoyed the console.

Absolutely scandalous.
You are definitely softer when it comes to anything related to Microsoft (and if they are judging you based on your recent postings, then bringing up what you use to do hardly matters) — that is the impression you seem to be giving now. Having all systems does not absolve you of bias. We all have them. You prefer to game on Xbox, and that's pretty clear from how you share your opinions, how you judge games, etc etc. They have definitely shaped your opinions on this, and naturally, why wouldn't they? You seem to like what they are offering you right now, and you want more of that, but I feel like that is also blinding you here a little bit.

EDIT
CMA isn't looking out for Sony anymore than Microsoft is. Anyway, most people here have said at one point or another that the deal will likely pass, but it will likely have some concessions; what shape those take is what remains to be seen.

EDIT
Not trying to say there is anything wrong with having a preference btw.
 
Last edited:

FUBARx89

Member
I see we're back onto the -

"Sony is dominant because they buy devs and exclusivity" again.

Some of you really do have a shite memory.

Both companies have paid for exclusives. Both companies have money hatted for timed exclusives. Both companies have bought out devs. Yes both companies have bought publishers (Psygnosis & Bethesda)
 

Sanepar

Member
I think at this point Sony needs to have a plan B(try to buy a big publisher to counter(EA or Take2) or buy small jap publishers like(capcom and square) besides that i don't how they will compete on the long term. Because if they deal goes on Microsoft will not gonna stop there.
 
I think at this point Sony needs to have a plan B(try to buy a big publisher to counter(EA or Take2) or buy small jap publishers like(capcom and square) besides that i don't how they will compete on the long term. Because if they deal goes on Microsoft will not gonna stop there.
they already have one and they are executing it as we speak
 

ToadMan

Member
Are regulators swayed by this? I'm pretty sure most of the efforts to do this before have failed to sway anybody. Any evidence to back up these theories that it helps?

Yesterday we had a vocal minority say that basically the deal was done and all of these "announcements" were because they knew it was a done deal. Turns out that's bullshit. So who was swayed by any of this in the end?

Well I say the regulators are influenced because the CMA took a CoD player survey and included the results in their published reports.

Now they’re not gonna put too much weight on it - surveys aren’t exhaustive- but their remit is to protect consumers so within reason they have to take sentiment on board.

EDiT : Oh and just to say that in the wake of yesterday’s event quite a few neutrals I saw here and there felt progress had been made by MS. So you’d have to say the messaging worked for those people without context.
 
Last edited:

FUBARx89

Member
Denise Richards.

Only knew her from wild things.

Happy Antonio Banderas GIF

Starship Troopers too.
 
  • Strength
Reactions: GHG
Ni No Kuni is 50% of the reason I bought a PS3. Journey was intriguing as well. I don't think you can definitively say what exactly gained marketshare for the PS3 and what didn't.

There's a confluence of factors that led to the PS3 gaining marketshare at the end of that generation. 1st party exclusives, 3rd party exclusives, it being a blu-ray player, the consoles price cut. To say one of these things didn't have influence is disingenuous and is pretty transparently trying to downplay what doesn't fit your argument of 'natural growth' or "the right way to be competitive".
I never said any of these factors were the sole reason. Heck, we haven't even brought up PS+'s debut and Sony being the ones to first deploy a service that gave out games of all budget levels for a monthly subscription fee.

There is no right or wrong way to try to compete in a market in a capitalist economy. I have never once said that what MS is doing here is in anyway wrong; they are fully entitled to attempt to make this purchase and to see it through. The regulators are the ones with their pre-set rules on who they aim to protect or enable with their regulatory scrutiny, but its ultimately all politics in the end. By the same token, Sony is also well within their right to defend or grow their market position in whichever way or ways they deem appropriate.
 
Pretty much the same thing as mentioning Azure.

Azure’s one of the main pillars of Microsoft today, and it’s been growing YoY. You going “No COD, no Azure” is orders of magnitude worse than going with Office or Windows.
The only mistake I made was not realising how intentionally obtuse people on the internet are and their need to have things drawn in crayon so that they can understand it.

No Cod, No azure, means without the leverage of CoD, using Azure becomes exponentially more difficult.

It is on my head for expecting people who have attention spans of nano-seconds can't think further than the headline to look deeper as to what is going on. I repeat myself from earlier, this deal has nothing to do with CoD or Playstation other than using them as leverage for Azure. MS want and need CoD on Playstation.

Microsoft want and need their games on Gefore Now and Nintendo.

And I'll bet a lifetime ban, 5 million MS points and an avatar change that Zenimax games will launch on Playstation, probably as a way to appease FTC/EU/CMA to help get the ABK deal through.

The same CMA that clearly indicated they’re open to listening to MS attempts to convince them that behavioral remedies can alleviate the risks they outlined?

The CMA said no to behavioural remedies and will only listen to structural remedies.
 
Last edited:

Foilz

Banned
The only mistake I made was not realising how intentionally obtuse people on the internet are and their need to have things drawn in crayon so that they can understand it.

No Cod, No azure, means without the leverage of CoD, using Azure becomes exponentially more difficult.

It is on my head for expecting people who have attention spans of nano-seconds can't think further than the headline to look deeper as to what is going on. I repeat myself from earlier, this deal has nothing to do with CoD or Playstation other than using them as leverage for Azure. MS want and need CoD on Playstation.

Microsoft want and need their games on Gefore Now and Nintendo.

And I'll bet a lifetime ban, 5 million MS points and an avatar change that Zenimax games will launch on Playstation, probably as a way to appease FTC/EU/CMA to help get the ABK deal through.



The CMA said no to behavioural remedies and will only listen to structural remedies.
I have no issue with zeni games on PSN but after 1 yr on Xbox/pc
 

Punished Miku

Human Rights Subscription Service
EDIT
Not trying to say there is anything wrong with having a preference btw.
And I would be fine with that statement as well. The point is there's zero evidence that I am so heavily biased that I'm incapable of changing my mind, or that I am lying. I skipped PS3 for years because of how expensive it was. Then Xbox 360 raised the price of Live and started talking TV, PS+ came out with the free games model and free online and I jumped to Sony again. Skipped Xbox One because nothing interested me, and it was the more expensive one. Then they sold me on the Gamepass initiative which is pretty similar to what drove me to PS+ initially on PS3. I literally have gone back and forth depending on how they're doing. The one I'm most consistently in favor of is Nintendo, and even then, I didn't get a Wii for like 4 years.

Do any of you guys have anything in your bio that showcases that kind of open mindedness in regards to console brands? I also got a fucking Quest 2 when RE4 came out after hating Facebook and never touching social media my whole life. I even got a NeoGeo Pocket, Saturn, Dreamcast, PSP, Vita and Wii U.

If anyone wants to call me a console warrior, they can look in the mirror first and start by telling us about their past.

Thirty7ven Thirty7ven you can go first.
 
Last edited:

Umbasaborne

Banned
I have no issue with zeni games on PSN but after 1 yr on Xbox/pc
Why would you care though? Do you have microsoft stock? peoples protectiveness over their exclusives is really something else. This goes for everyone, including the bitch cry babies who whine when playstation games are announced for pc.
 

jm89

Member
And I would be fine with that statement as well. The point is there's zero evidence that I am so heavily biased that I'm incapable of changing my mind, or that I am lying. I skipped PS3 for years because of how expensive it was. Then Xbox 360 raised the price of Live and started talking TV, PS+ came out with the free games model and free online and I jumped to Sony again. Skipped Xbox One because nothing interested me, and it was the more expensive one. Then they sold me on the Gamepass initiative which is pretty similar to what drove me to PS+ initially on PS3. I literally have gone back and forth depending on how they're doing. The one I'm most consistently in favor of is Nintendo, and even then, I didn't get a Wii for like 4 years.

Do any of you guys have anything in your bio that showcases that kind of open mindedness in regards to console brands? I also got a fucking Quest 2 when RE4 came out after hating Facebook and never touching social media my whole life. I even got a NeoGeo Pocket.

If anyone wants to call me a console warrior, they can look in the mirror first and start by telling us about their past.

Thirty7ven Thirty7ven you can go first.
giphy.gif
 

POKEYCLYDE

Member
I never said any of these factors were the sole reason. Heck, we haven't even brought up PS+'s debut and Sony being the ones to first deploy a service that gave out games of all budget levels for a monthly subscription fee.

There is no right or wrong way to try to compete in a market in a capitalist economy. I have never once said that what MS is doing here is in anyway wrong; they are fully entitled to attempt to make this purchase and to see it through. The regulators are the ones with their pre-set rules on who they aim to protect or enable with their regulatory scrutiny, but its ultimately all politics in the end. By the same token, Sony is also well within their right to defend or grow their market position in whichever way or ways they deem appropriate.
I agree. There is no right or wrong way to compete.

However what I quoted from your post clearly downplays 3rd party exclusives in Sony gaining marketshare during the PS3 generation, which I believe is false. If that wasn't your intent, okay.
 

sainraja

Member
And I would be fine with that statement as well. The point is there's zero evidence that I am so heavily biased that I'm incapable of changing my mind, or that I am lying. I skipped PS3 for years because of how expensive it was. Then Xbox 360 raised the price of Live and started talking TV, PS+ came out with the free games model and free online and I jumped to Sony again. Skipped Xbox One because nothing interested me, and it was the more expensive one. Then they sold me on the Gamepass initiative which is pretty similar to what drove me to PS+ initially on PS3. I literally have gone back and forth depending on how they're doing. The one I'm most consistently in favor of is Nintendo, and even then, I didn't get a Wii for like 4 years.

Do any of you guys have anything in your bio that showcases that kind of open mindedness in regards to console brands? I also got a fucking Quest 2 when RE4 came out after hating Facebook and never touching social media my whole life. I even got a NeoGeo Pocket.

If anyone wants to call me a console warrior, they can look in the mirror first and start by telling us about their past.

Thirty7ven Thirty7ven you can go first.
I wasn't calling you a warrior, just that you seem to go softer on MS these days. Personally, I get all systems (XSX, PS5, Switch, dated gaming PC, Xbox One (now sold), PS4 (now sold), Xbox 360 (sold) and PS3). On the PC, I prefer to buy games on GOG whenever possible and am not huge on Steam. (I don't see the point of this and what it really proves, outside maybe the ability to get them all because I think most would, if they could).
 
Isn't cod the whole point of the deal.
Microsoft have played at being clowns and basically pretended not to know how successful COD is, how many teams make it, how well it sells etc, all while saying publicly that mobile was the largest factor for the purchase.

Everyone knows COD is the biggest reason and Sony are right to call them out on that. There isn’t anyone else who can make COD becuase they don’t have the number of studios to keep it going and release on a yearly cadence.

Microsoft keep pretending they can’t compete despite having the largest number of 1st party studios, a huge war chest, leverage of the PC market, and the largest cloud network. The fact that they’ve underperformed is down to their own poor management, and now it’s sad that they have reverted to form and are trying to buy their way to success rather than earn it.
 
Last edited:

Varteras

Member
I think at this point Sony needs to have a plan B(try to buy a big publisher to counter(EA or Take2) or buy small jap publishers like(capcom and square) besides that i don't how they will compete on the long term. Because if they deal goes on Microsoft will not gonna stop there.

Sony has been making their moves to beef up since 2019. That's when they, finally, bought Insomniac. Which was a big deal because they were one of the few large studios still independent. That gave them a studio that makes quality games at a high output along with VR experience.

Then in mid-2021 and all the way through early 2022, they made a flurry of purchases. Housemarque, Nixxes, Firesprite, Bluepoint, Valkyrie, Bungie, and Haven. Studios of various sizes, impact, and specialties. Most of which Sony lacked prior to purchase. Everything from arcade-like shooters, PC porting, multiplayer games, mobile-esque titles, first-person shooters, and live service experiences. Like Insomniac, Firesprite and Bungie were notable as being large, independent studios with anywhere from several hundred to nearly a thousand employees.

Then later in 2022 they grabbed Savage Game Studios which is a mobile developer aiming to create big mobile experiences. Recently there has been rumor and speculation, with good reason, that Sony bought Ballistic Moon. A new developer that may be making a survival horror game for Sony.

This is on top of Sony funding projects with third-parties like Firewalk and Deviation, who are both expected to be making first-person shooters for PlayStation. The latter of which has been speculated as having been on the verge of purchase by Sony. Then you have nearly all of their existing studios going on hiring sprees to increase output or make their games bigger.

Sony has directly stated their desire to expand and compete in areas they really haven't been, and live service games are a huge part of that drive. They certainly aren't sitting down on this. Ryan has made it clear that acquisitions will continue because that is the fastest way for Sony to achieve its goals. Though Hulst has tempered that by making it clear that any studios brought under him will have to be ones who fit their strategy well and match the culture.

The reality is, PlayStation will, at the very least, have CoD on it for a long while yet. Regulators have made it clear that is the bare minimum concession they will accept. That gives Sony ample time to come up with a CoD competitor. And that competitor doesn't even need to top CoD. It just needs to be like Battlefield use to be. A quality competitor that was able to steal some of CoD's thunder.

As far as where Microsoft goes after this, if the deal passes with no structural remedies, which at this point seems very unlikely but possible, you can be certain that future major acquisitions by Microsoft would be met with even more fierce pushback. Because at that point it will be undeniably obvious that Microsoft is not trying to simply compete. They're trying to outright buy the industry and race it to the bottom. But don't expect that to be the case. Microsoft is making this massive purchase, which is in no way chump change to them, because it was a unique opportunity that fell in their lap a year ago. It's basically a once-in-a-lifetime deal for the company.

Contrary to what any fanboy wants to believe, Microsoft as a whole is not eager to spend every last dime of their cash reserves buying companies they'll have to fight over every time for a division of their business that is minor compared to where they really make their money.
 
I agree. There is no right or wrong way to compete.

However what I quoted from your post clearly downplays 3rd party exclusives in Sony gaining marketshare during the PS3 generation, which I believe is false. If that wasn't your intent, okay.
I mean, the biggest 3rd party exclusive for the PS3 was unquestionably MGS4, and while it did give the console a sales bump, it wasn't a sustained bump, at least not for 2008. Once we get to Uncharted 2 in 2009, the sales begin consistently increasing and continues for the remainder of the generation, but it was with Uncharted 2 that loads of Sony's efforts to bolster their 1st-party output really come to fruition.

It also should be noted that HD-DVD didn't bow until March 2008, some 3 odd months prior to MGS4 releasing, which also gave it a sales bump that actually did raise the sales 'floor' for the PS3 from then onwards. And while Sony was producing loads of exclusive going into either MGS4 or UC2, it really wasn't until UC2 onwards where their output was notably and consistently higher than what they were producing before.

Like we both agreed, the success formula for the PS3 is a far more nuanced tale than just one thing or another - its a confluence of factors as you said. I never implied that 3rd parties have never been a part of Sony's success story in the console space - you'd have to be an idiot to imply that it wasn't. My entire point here is that Sony's success in the console space has less to do with one particular factor (3rd party exclusives, in this case) and more to do with all the other factors *in addition* to that.

To put it another way - lets imagine a scenario where we remove one of these factors out of any particular generation: 1st party for PS2, CD-Rom drive for PS1, 3rd party deals for PS3 or 4; does Sony reach the same level of success they currently have if you take any of these out? My opinion: they absolutely don't become what they currently are if you take any of these factors out.
 
Last edited:

KyoZz

Tag, you're it.
I followed this whole situation from afar, what are the chances that the deal is made so far? Or we have no idea?
 

Varteras

Member
I followed this whole situation from afar, what are the chances that the deal is made so far? Or we have no idea?

Will probably pass the EC with behavioral remedies like ensuring CoD is on competing platforms for a good length of time. Probably 10 years minimum. But still no solid indications yet.

The CMA is open to suggestions but have said they doubt anything less than Microsoft divesting CoD and associated studios will work. Which Microsoft has said they will walk away from the deal if that happens. So now we wait a few weeks to see who blinks first.

The FTC hasn't yet budged on blocking the deal. Because of them, we could see this deal tied up in US courts for awhile if the CMA or EC don't make Microsoft walk away first.
 
I followed this whole situation from afar, what are the chances that the deal is made so far? Or we have no idea?
At the absolute best, 50/50. Realistically, 20% chance, probably 15%. But really, its all speculative. No one knows how the EC really felt about yesterday's presentation, or how the CMA feels about the NVidia deal.

The Nvidia portion does speak to some of the objections both regulators had on the emerging Cloud market, but it doesn't answer the question that both entities wanted a remedial solution for, which is 'what remedy can you offer to ensure new market participants, besides those who are already in Cloud right now, can compete should they decide to entire it'. This is a key concern due to how young the emerging cloud market is, and both regulator's concerns is that ATVI & CoD represent such a distinct advantage that no one would try to enter the cloud market to compete since MS is already the dominant player in that space and this move would just entrench it further. The solution the CMA suggested was a perpetual licensing agreement for a fair market wage for anyone in the cloud or subscription services market to gain access to CoD should they want it.

Enabling a Cloud market competitor like Nvidia doesn't really address that concern. They also didn't really provide any behavioral remedies yesterday regarding the objections both the CMA and EC raised regarding the affects the deal would have in the console space. And unlike the CMA, the EC also had objections regarding what this transaction would do for gaming subscriptions, which again, MS didn't seem to offer anything for that yesterday.
 

Thirty7ven

Banned
And I would be fine with that statement as well. The point is there's zero evidence that I am so heavily biased that I'm incapable of changing my mind, or that I am lying. I skipped PS3 for years because of how expensive it was. Then Xbox 360 raised the price of Live and started talking TV, PS+ came out with the free games model and free online and I jumped to Sony again. Skipped Xbox One because nothing interested me, and it was the more expensive one. Then they sold me on the Gamepass initiative which is pretty similar to what drove me to PS+ initially on PS3. I literally have gone back and forth depending on how they're doing. The one I'm most consistently in favor of is Nintendo, and even then, I didn't get a Wii for like 4 years.

Do any of you guys have anything in your bio that showcases that kind of open mindedness in regards to console brands? I also got a fucking Quest 2 when RE4 came out after hating Facebook and never touching social media my whole life. I even got a NeoGeo Pocket, Saturn, Dreamcast, PSP, Vita and Wii U.

If anyone wants to call me a console warrior, they can look in the mirror first and start by telling us about their past.

Thirty7ven Thirty7ven you can go first.

Oh ok ok you put me on the spot I mean you got me blushing nobody ever cared about my vidya past. Where do I start So…


I never met my father. My momma was a working woman you know I’m sayin? Yeah. And the house you know, it was her place of biness ya feel? And every time she brought a mang around I would, you know, ax him the question. Are you my father? I got slapped around a couple of times, by the not my father mangs and then my mom she would clean me up and tell me to go in the room and play with some toys. But I would tell her, I don’t want no toys, I want my father. So one day I she says “you father is in your room” and go there and there’s this black box. She says “You see Sony here? Sony is your father, and PlayStation over there under the tv? That’s your sister.” And I never left the room again. Shit I’m posting from that same room right now, it’s my house now, me and my father we sold my mom back in the triple days, Ps3 man that sis was expensive.

So yeah Sony, PlayStation, we family. And family sticks together. Nothing comes between family ya feel?
 
Last edited:

POKEYCLYDE

Member
Sony has been making their moves to beef up since 2019. That's when they, finally, bought Insomniac. Which was a big deal because they were one of the few large studios still independent. That gave them a studio that makes quality games at a high output along with VR experience.

Then in mid-2021 and all the way through early 2022, they made a flurry of purchases. Housemarque, Nixxes, Firesprite, Bluepoint, Valkyrie, Bungie, and Haven. Studios of various sizes, impact, and specialties. Most of which Sony lacked prior to purchase. Everything from arcade-like shooters, PC porting, multiplayer games, mobile-esque titles, first-person shooters, and live service experiences. Like Insomniac, Firesprite and Bungie were notable as being large, independent studios with anywhere from several hundred to nearly a thousand employees.

Then later in 2022 they grabbed Savage Game Studios which is a mobile developer aiming to create big mobile experiences. Recently there has been rumor and speculation, with good reason, that Sony bought Ballistic Moon. A new developer that may be making a survival horror game for Sony.

This is on top of Sony funding projects with third-parties like Firewalk and Deviation, who are both expected to be making first-person shooters for PlayStation. The latter of which has been speculated as having been on the verge of purchase by Sony. Then you have nearly all of their existing studios going on hiring sprees to increase output or make their games bigger.

Sony has directly stated their desire to expand and compete in areas they really haven't been, and live service games are a huge part of that drive. They certainly aren't sitting down on this. Ryan has made it clear that acquisitions will continue because that is the fastest way for Sony to achieve its goals. Though Hulst has tempered that by making it clear that any studios brought under him will have to be ones who fit their strategy well and match the culture.

The reality is, PlayStation will, at the very least, have CoD on it for a long while yet. Regulators have made it clear that is the bare minimum concession they will accept. That gives Sony ample time to come up with a CoD competitor. And that competitor doesn't even need to top CoD. It just needs to be like Battlefield use to be. A quality competitor that was able to steal some of CoD's thunder.

As far as where Microsoft goes after this, if the deal passes with no structural remedies, which at this point seems very unlikely but possible, you can be certain that future major acquisitions by Microsoft would be met with even more fierce pushback. Because at that point it will be undeniably obvious that Microsoft is not trying to simply compete. They're trying to outright buy the industry and race it to the bottom. But don't expect that to be the case. Microsoft is making this massive purchase, which is in no way chump change to them, because it was a unique opportunity that fell in their lap a year ago. It's basically a once-in-a-lifetime deal for the company.

Contrary to what any fanboy wants to believe, Microsoft as a whole is not eager to spend every last dime of their cash reserves buying companies they'll have to fight over every time for a division of their business that is minor compared to where they really make their money.
I agree, but you also have to infer as to why Microsoft is willing to make all these expensive acquisitions. Their long term strategy views gaming as a core pillar to their overall growth in the future.

It would be naive to believe Microsoft would back off of their long term goals because they hit a roadblock (the roadblock being the ABK acquisition being blocked).

I agree Microsoft wouldn't be spending $70B outside of this acquisition on gaming and they're only spending this much because of the golden opportunity that was presented. However, even a fraction of the $70B can do a lot in terms of acquisitions.

I've spouted this fact before, but Microsoft could buy Kadokawa, Capcom and Square Enix at double what they're currently worth and that would roughly only be worth HALF what this ABK acquistion is worth. (This isn't a revenge fan fic, it's just to show how staggeringly expensive ABK is in comparison to other major publishers, and how much Microsoft is willing to invest into their gaming future).

So I agree that Microsoft isn't eager to spend every last dime of their cash reserves on gaming, but there is a reason why they're going so hard in the first place, and this acquisition getting blocked (as much as some would like to believe) doesn't mean they'll stop pursuing acquisitions. Gaming is minor to their business currently, but it has the potential to be a major part of their business. That potential is why you're seeing so much investment from Microsoft.
 

Punished Miku

Human Rights Subscription Service
Oh ok ok you put me on the spot I mean you got me blushing nobody ever cared about my vidya past. Where do I start So…


I never met my father. My momma was a working woman you know I’m sayin? Yeah. And the house you know, it was her place of biness ya feel? And every time she brought a mang around I would, you know, ax him the question. Are you my father? I got slapped around a couple of times, by the not my father mangs and then my mom she would clean me up and tell me to go in the room and play with some toys. But I would tell her, I don’t want no toys, I want my father. So one day I she says “you father is in your room” and go there and there’s this black box. She says “You see Sony here? Sony is your father, and PlayStation over there under the tv? That’s your sister.” And I never left the room again. Shit I’m posting from that same room right now, it’s my house now, me and my father we sold my mom back in the triple days, Ps3 man that sis was expensive.

So yeah Sony, PlayStation, we family. And family sticks together. Nothing comes between family ya feel?
So you can't answer the question? I can appreciate a joke as much as anyone, but don't start insinuating shit about me if you can't even answer the same thing about yourself. I didn't start it. You did. Now you can't even answer.

You're the one so interested in my past and if I ever disagreed with Xbox. Pathetic response, genuinely. Complete hypocrisy for everyone to see, except a few of the usual suspects laughing along with you - and everyone knows who it is.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom