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

Do you believe the deal will be approved?

  • Yes, will be approved without changes.

    Votes: 221 24.9%

  • Yes, will be approved but with structural changes to ABK.

    Votes: 102 11.5%

  • Yes, will be approved but only with behavioral concessions.

    Votes: 262 29.6%

  • No, will not be approved.

    Votes: 301 34.0%
  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
saintjules said:
Charleyy looking extra thicc today :messenger_sunglasses:
Click to expand...

Jonah Hill No GIF by The Taboo Group
 
IbizaPocholo said:
[/URL]

Phil Spencer was in the UK this week for talks with the Competition and Markets Authority, following a European Commission hearing in which it defended the proposed deal amid concerns it could harm competition, particularly if it were to make games like Call of Duty exclusive to its platform.

The CMA is in the middle of an in-depth investigation into the acquisition, while it also faces challenges from the European Commission and the US FTC.

Although the deal would be by far Microsoft's biggest ever acquisition, the corporation makes far more from non-gaming products such as Windows, Office and its cloud services.

The Times asked Spencer what would happen to Xbox should such an important acquisition be blocked by regulators, to which he responded that the gaming business was not dependent on its completion.

"This is an important acquisition for us. It's not some linchpin to the long term — Xbox will exist if this deal doesn't go through," he said.

Much of regulators' concerns around the Activision Blizzard deal have focused on how it could allegedly reduce PlayStation's ability to compete given that it would see Microsoft gain ownership of the Call of Duty series, which Sony has called "irreplaceable".

Spencer said that he was baffled why regulators were seemingly protecting the console firm, which it claimed in a press conference last week controls a 70 percent mark share in the console business.

Microsoft recently said it had offered Sony a 10-year, legally enforceable contract to make each new Call of Duty game available on PlayStation the same day it comes to Xbox.

"Competition is us trying to get stronger," Spencer told The Times. "I don't have great rationale for … how better competition in consoles is somehow hurtful for consumers.

"Because to me, having us, Sony, and Nintendo doing well in the console market — all of us with strengths and uniqueness and content and capabilities — gives consumers more choice.

"I'd hate to see consoles go to where phones are where there are only two manufacturers. And, right now, we have three good competitors."

In addition to regulatory concerns around competition in the console market, potential influence on the cloud gaming market is also being explored. Given the complexity of the investigations, Spencer said he feels sympathy for regulators.

"Most of the time in my career at Xbox as I've met with government regulators, there's been a real lack of knowledge about the games industry," he said.

"I've appreciated spending time with them and in certain cases helping to educate. I think for a lot of the regulators, this is the first time they've looked at this industry."
Click to expand...
Phil was asked a direct question and he answered it and it gets spun here that the deal is failing and he knows it.

If Phil wouldn't have answered the question the way he did it gets spun here Xbox is doomed without it

Stephen Colbert Idk GIF by The Late Show With Stephen Colbert
 
Very good conversation until 09:40. After that, it just feels like an advert for the ABK acquisition and planted questions for Phil to answer and create a favorable environment for the acquisition to pass.

It also contains a lot of "Phil talk."

Regarding COD/ABK exclusivity on Xbox:

"I'll say, from the beginning of this, it was never about that. We never had in our model anywhere where we're pulling Call of Duty or something away from PlayStation."
Click to expand...

I think Phil forgot that he has already used this exact line elsewhere. The following is from October 2020 (after announcing but before closing the Zenimax acquisition:

"This deal was not done to take games away from another player base like that. Nowhere in the documentation that we put together was: 'How do we keep other players from playing these games?' We want more people to be able to play games, not fewer people to be able to go play games."
Click to expand...

And then made Zenimax games exclusives.
 
Last edited:
SneakersSO said:
Okay, caught up on today's big blow up about MS. It honestly feels like these threads monitoring these deals are now spilling over into media narratives about Xbox in games.

I've already spoken at length in this thread that MS will never leave gaming - the vertical integrations they get in gaming for their bigger sectors, namely Cloud services/Azure, will ensure it stays there. But i've also outlined in here - what MS looks in gaming could very well change, and like i've stated before, that doesn't necessarily mean that even if they were to cut the Xbox HW line out of the equation, that they still couldn't be actively making and releasing games.

If you took everything about MS' current business plan and removed the HW angle, the whole thing becomes a far, far smarter play for them.
Click to expand...
Isn't that obvious though?
I mean I thought that was MS Plan with gamepass was from the start.
Make a subscription service with cloud gaming (which is then plattform agnostic) and then stop making console hardware once you've reached a certain amount of subscriptions.

That line of thought isn't hard to come up with. The hard part is making cloud gaming actually enjoyable.

I tried using google stadia and at least here in germany this stuff won't work. Not at home and certainly not on the move at least not in the way I would see as enjoyable.
 
Great interview. I just wish I could trust an interview that is set up with canned questions. Part of the reason I want this to all be over is being able to watch something like this and not think about it being targeted at regulators and the acquisition.
 
Nice interview but more talking is not what is needed right now.
Agreed on Forza Horizon 5 Rally DLC though, it's going to be awesome! Looked a lot like Rallisport Challenge. Do they have people on the team who worked on that one?
Main concern: Do we have to wait until June for a new Xbox showcase? Does that mean no Starfield shown until then?
 
DenchDeckard said:
Totally makes sense, but I think you're a more middle of the road person/player/human lol

What does it take to sway those people that aren't that, I don't think they can...becuase I've been having these conversations since the 360 was at the pinnacle of its gaming mindshare....there's loads of those people that used to just say things like...I don't need an xbox ill just buy a pc...but they never did buy a pc and missed out on great games.

I'm coming from the perspective that one game could make me invest in a platform...so I'm not sure what MS needs to do but I admit they've been light on games and that's on them. They do have great games and game pass is killer so I dunno..
Click to expand...
As a PC and PS owner I'll tell you,

1.) You need games. Exklusive Games that are worth investing in a new/different plattform.
As "easy" as that.
You would have to make 5 polished great games (gameplay, artistic or graphics wise) on the release and have a line up for another game every few months.

2.) You need interesting forward thinking hardware that isn't something you'll get in the pc space ("gimmicky/niche" stuff with support/usage from first party output)

Why would I need an xbox? I've been playing on pc even before sony made their first console. I am only invested in sony because they made good games on different hardware. Sure that has changed with the ps4 but even with that gen they at least tried the VR stuff. With the current gen both xbox and Ps5 went ahead and removed data throughput bottlenecks. We need stuff that will be "betatested" on consoles and then find larger adoption.
And betatesting new stuff on consoles is somewhat easier because they have a fixed hardware.

Sorry about my incoherent rambling
 
HeisenbergFX4 said:
Phil was asked a direct question and he answered it and it gets spun here that the deal is failing and he knows it.

If Phil wouldn't have answered the question the way he did it gets spun here Xbox is doomed without it
Click to expand...

I don't have the link but previously, Phil Spencer said that without ATVI's mobile XBOX was "Untenable."

Phil has a long history of double speak. You can't blame us for keeping receipts.
 
Pelta88 said:
I don't have the link but previously, Phil Spencer said that without ATVI's mobile XBOX was "Untenable."

Phil has a long history of double speak. You can't blame us for keeping receipts.
Click to expand...
Which tells you their whole sub model is a loss leader. Like most sub services, especially early on. They want that mobile revenue to cook the books.
 
Pelta88 said:
I don't have the link but previously, Phil Spencer said that without ATVI's mobile XBOX was "Untenable."

Phil has a long history of double speak. You can't blame us for keeping receipts.
Click to expand...

It helps to read the actual full quote, he's talking about all the gaming companies, not just Xbox, being untenable if they don't find more users in the mobile sphere, as it is the fastest growing part of the gaming medium.

"That's just a place where if we don't gain relevancy as a gaming brand—we're not alone in seeing this—over time, the business will become kind of untenable, for any of us. If we're not able to find customers on phones, on any screen that someone wants to play on, you really are going to get segmented to a niche part of gaming that running a global business will become very challenging."
Click to expand...
 
Ok. So an interview a day until this dumb acquisition is approved?

Xbox is basically trying to bore regulators to approval.

When will this pr bullshit stop?
 
Nice interview. Two things that I remarked and are in my opinion relevant to this thread:
- Phil Spencer talk at one point about "what kind of remedies" will be necessary. First time I heard him thay the world in this sense. So maybe Microsoft will accept what the CMA asked them?
- The interviewer asked him point blank about exclusivities and COD in the same way that some of us do here: "You buyed Bethesda and then made Starfield exclusive. What will be in the way of doing that on COD?" (not the true statement but close enough I hope) and he talked a lot, but not true answer outside of we want to make games for a bigger audience, and we do make exclusives sometimes...
It is a reminder that outside of promises nothing can stop Microsoft if they want to make COD exclusive if the deal pass without remedies.
 
ReBurn said:
Nintendo is proof that Sony doesn't need Call of Duty, though
Click to expand...
You don't buy a Nintendo and expect to play call of duty.

You expect to be able to play call of duty if you buy a PlayStation.

Call of Duty is one of the top series that gives Sony the most revenue. Sony would be braindead to not care about their cash cow.
Gamezone said:
Haven't paid much attention to this. What's the status on buying Activision? How likely is it to happen?
Click to expand...
Xbox fanboys says the deal will go through.
PlayStation fanboys says the deal died many moons ago.
Griffon said:
Not quite.

If it wasn't for MS standardizing Xbox Live subs, neither Sony nor Nintendo would've dared to make their online P2P a paid subscription.
Click to expand...
I'm maybe the minority, but I'd rather pay 40 bucks for a flawless working experience than the one there was on ps3.
It was a hell to join your friends games, and there wasn't a lobby system as we know now, but was game dependent. Was also a hell to get chat to work.

Would i rather want it for free? Yes of course, but if I compare the free with the paid option I'd rather pay for the convenience.

Nintendos problem is they charge for online while they haven't figured out voice chat lol. I know it's the cheapest option, probably because they knew that was the price they could get away with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

MS/ABK is advertising games that don't exist for data collection
46
2K
POKEYCLYDE replied
My apologies to Ubisoft, Sony, Activision, EA, MS etc. for making a big deal out of $70 games
2 3 4
156
6K
MDSLKTR replied
Microsoft, Activision Deny Report Regarding Financial Performance
Business Hardware  2 3
131
11K
Jaybe replied
What happened to all the people that were cheering over that MS Activision acquisition?
Drama  5 6 7 8 9
414
18K
GateofD replied
Microsoft has Closed the Activision Blizzard King Deal
22 23 24 25 26
1K
98K
MasterCornholio replied
Top Bottom