TheGodfather07
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
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
microsoft about to make sure the CMA approve..
Legit question, if CMA and EU approve this, will that pressure FTC to do the same quicker than their current timeline ?
Last edited by a moderator:
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
I'm pretty sure that's where MS wants to go with Xbox. They don't want to be in the hardware business they want to be in services.
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
FBeeEye
Banned
Because Xbox generates billions of dollars for them and is their most successful consumer product. That's why it's not going anywhere. Phil Spencer sits at the table with Satya Nadella. Xbox is a major Microsoft business.
So get rid of this fever dream fantasy of Microsoft becoming a 3rd party developer.
Last edited:
splattered
Member
And this is the exact response i've expected the entire time... just in reverse between team blue and green depending on what happens. Either the regulators are completely useless or just doing the right thing...
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
Ha, there is a reason this thread is so huge and it's not because of all the insight and carefully reasoned takes. We love to argue, ever since politics got shut down there has been a pent up need for a thread where people can just fight without an actual wrong or right answer. Expect this thread to continue even after a decision goes one way or the other.
TheGodfather07
Member
it would though. CMA pretty much closed the door without microsoft divesting call of duty. if they did a u turn on that now and approved, it would make them look useless. they didnt want to accept the 10 year deal before so why would they all of a sudden change their stance?
reinking
Gold Member
Regardless of the outcome, that would be shortsighted of Sony. 10 years buys them one console generation. We are all free to move on with our lives at any time. We're all here in this thread and following the topic by choice.
Last edited:
They said they are open to proposals. The idea of funding a third party regulator and possibly offering AB games could be enough to sway them.
Last edited:
Varteras
Member
Yeah. I've been feeling that the three regulators each kind of represent a different kind of hurdle. The EC was the one most likely to set the minimum bar for concessions. So if the EC says, "10-years of CoD, or all ABK games, on all platforms", then we know what the floor is and MS will then have to hope they convince the other two to accept that.
The CMA is the one most likely to kill the deal either by outright blocking it or imposing structural remedies that cause MS to walk away. If the deal doesn't die with the CMA, it most likely survives all the regulators. Though then the question becomes, what kind of remedies would they accept? Any behavioral remedies would likely be even more strict than the EC. Would the CMA offer some kind of structural remedy that MS agrees to?
As for the FTC, I look at them as the ones who will drag this out no matter what. Even though they're the ones completely saying "No" right now, I don't think they'll be able to maintain that if both the CMA and EC say "Yes". I think they'll drag it out to a final conclusion in a Federal court maybe a couple years from now. Though a question still remains. Would a Federal judge demand strict remedies that MS doesn't like?
So for a TLDR; EC represents the minimum bar. CMA represents the possible killshot. FTC represents a long delay to conclusion.
Last edited:
Yup I agree and that's my feeling as well.Yeah. I've been feeling that the three regulators each kind of represent a different kind of hurdle. The EC was the one most likely to set the minimum bar for concessions. So if the EC says, "10-years of CoD, or all ABK games, on all platforms", then we know what the floor is and MS will then have to hope they convince the other two to accept that.
The CMA is the one most likely to kill the deal either by outright blocking it or imposing structural remedies that cause MS to walk away. If the deal doesn't die with the CMA, it most likely survives all the regulators. Though then the question becomes, what kind of remedies would they accept? Any behavioral remedies would likely be even more strict than the EC. Would the CMA offer some kind of structural remedy that MS agrees to?
As for the FTC, I look at them as the ones who will drag this out no matter what. Even though they're the ones completely saying "No" right now, I don't think they'll be able to maintain that if both the CMA and EC say "Yes". I think they'll drag it out to a final conclusion in a Federal court maybe a couple years from now. Though a question still remains. Would a Federal judge demand strict remedies that MS doesn't like?
So for a TLR; EC represents the minimum bar. CMA represents the possible killshot. FTC represents a long delay to conclusion.
EU will decide the minimum Microsoft will be forced to concede.
CMA is the only one that can totally block the whole thing.
FTC might not have the odds of winning in court by their side but they sure are the ones that could drag this on for the longest time even into next year.
Last edited:
Solidsnake_1
Banned
Kenshin775
Member
It feels like its getting closer to happening. I think a 10 yr deal with the EC/CMA having the option to extend the deal another 10 yrs gets this deal over the finish line. Also no exclusive content and day and date. MS would be happy with that as long it comes to Game Pass.
Loxus
Member
10 years buy them enough time to make their own COD too.
Let's not kid ourselves, current Sony can do it easily. A Si-Fi TLOU style FPS isn't out of the realm of possibility for them to achieve.
James Sawyer Ford
Member
The sticking point will be parity with GamePass terms on PS plus
Personally I don’t see it happening as it’s complex to manage and the CMA admitted as such
gothmog
Gold Member
Interesting, will they stay at 10 years though is the question
Three people said to be familiar with the matter. Sounds like some great sources.
Sources were also sure this wouldn't be an issue based on the Zenimax purchase. I think there's a lot of wishful thinking here.
I do think if it's 10 years Microsoft treats ABK as an independent third party publisher they might get the deal closed.
Banjo64
cumsessed
Times are hard but it goes on sale for less than £15 on all platforms all the time, can’t be looking forward to it that much.
Kenshin775
Member
I thought the CMA just viewed Game Pass as an alternative payment method and not anti-competitive. I could have swore I read that somewhere. There is so much info could someone clarify this?
If that is the case then I dont think CoD on PS Plus will be a required remedy
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
Next gen big talking point will be that the next Xbox will be the only console to get CoD. Should make launches interesting.
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
I’ve been waiting for game pass. Just said I was looking forward to playing it, not chomping at the bit. Same with Crash Bandicoot 4. That will be one of my first downloads as well.
It’s really been a long time since I purchased a game from Activision.
Last edited:
jm89
Member
CMA still see cloud as an area of huge concern, I'd think ps plus will be in that conversation if concessions are made to put cod on competitors cloud services.
Last edited:
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
I feel MS are hoping to find evidence that Sony already have plans for this in their current document fishing expedition.
Sanepar
Member
Ok but what we need to know is if the deal will be cod only or all abk franchises for next 10 years.
James Sawyer Ford
Member
CMA stated CoD would need 100% parity on all aspects including distribution/cloud
So I don’t think it would be an option for Microsoft to get CoD on GamePass while it’s retail only for PS
TheGodfather07
Member
why are sony the ones who have to do all the work though? why are sony are the ones who have to create new ip to rival powerhouses like call of duty, fallout and elder scrolls. while microsoft can gain a foothold by simply spending large amounts of money to buy successful ip they didnt create? thats the definition of anti competitive behavior. to make it even worse microsoft moaned about sonys first party exclusives when they were new ip created by them! wtf?
Last edited:
Astray
Member
If regulators approve then it's simply business and they have to deal with it.
Fair and Unfair aren't part of anything here.
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
Having the game available on both consoles is parity. Come on man. This is like your “theft” argument again.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
DrFigs
Member
well you can't expect microsoft to make good games
TheGodfather07
Member
parity on all aspects though. how is it parity if cod is available on gamepass for a dollar but costs $70 on PS? cant you see how that would be an issue for regulators?
ToadMan
Member
Sony isn’t being investigated.
But they still have to provide documents because they’ve been subpoenaed by both MS and the FTC who want data for their cases.
Yeah your mind is blown by such craziness - I get it.
jm89
Member
I wouldn't bother with him, he has no idea what is going on or where he is.
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
Is it MS’s fault that Sony doesn’t want game pass on their platform?
TheGodfather07
Member
thats exactly what i expect. they are a trillion dollar corporation. why cant they create and grow new ip?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Here come the PR approved strawman arguments.
I was talking about the exclusivity contracts being presented in court but with proposed remedies that too.
ToTTenTranz
Banned
If Reuters' people already knew the outcome of EU's ongoing study, then we wouldn't be waiting another 2 months for the result.
It doesn't make sense and I call bullshit on this (like all the other "this is easily going to pass" predictions from journalists we've seen in the past year).
Banjo64
cumsessed
Possibly, depending on whether the terms they offered to Sony were blatantly one sided or created concerns around data gathering.
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
Wait, now you’re saying MS can’t be trusted!?
James Sawyer Ford
Member
what matters are the concerns/statements from the CMA regarding consumer harm and anticompetitive issues that arise from this acquisition
Loxus
Member
Because that's each company's strong point.
I know Microsoft way sucks, not just for PS fans but Xbox fans as well, but that's just how the world works.
70bn wasted and for what? Nothing but console wars bragging rights.
BennyBlanco
aka IMurRIVAL69
Imagine how grim MS software lineup would be if they hadn’t bought Bethesda. After an incredibly dry 2022 they would just have Forza this year.
DrFigs
Member
We're straying dangerously close to coping territory.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
If they still pass the merger, after their due diligence, will everyone here be OK with it and stop complaining tho ? It's been 2+ years and people are still not over the Zenimax merger.
Judging by their lawyers listing FF7, bloodborne, SFV etc from last gen they just want to say "look at all these exclusives they have planned, they can compete with those"
Punished Miku
Human Rights Subscription Service
Sony would have to pay a hell of a lot of money for MS to make the game and give it away on their sub service. I really doubt that's something they'll get. It would be somewhere around $1 billion annually.
Last edited:
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
Tweaktown again? And the same writer from the other negative Xbox story? Yeah, I’m not sure he’s reliable.
adamsapple
provided a story that called that guy into question as well. I can’t remember what it was exactly.- Status
Similar threads
- Locked