Support NeoGAF

[TheGodfather07]

Remember people said what would Microsoft do if the deal didn't pass? Well what are sony gonna do? Because Microsoft are really coming at them here and regulators ain't getting in the way. They must feel hugely threatened right now and I'm interested to see how they respond. Even more aggressive moneyhatting? Japanese publishers? Maybe even a western one as a defensive move before Microsoft swallow them up. Man i don't like this publisher buying crap. The industry is about to change, big time.

 

[sainraja]

Same shit I said from day one, but you guys just laugh and only listen to people who agree with you. Do you think it's normal for one of the 3 consoles to just be a laughing stock on here? "Xbox has no games." This is the argument and constant slander from vocal Sony fans. It's pretty obvious logic that if they have a more attractive offer for gamers, that means people are more likely to give their ecosystem a chance.

That is increased competition right there. Sony is utterly dominant right now. They raised the price of games and their system and the sales just went up. They're a juggernaut.

People used to say that about the PS3: "The PS3 has no games."
Microsoft messed up with the Xbox One all on their own. It wasn't Sony's doing.

Furthermore, you can literally just look at the recent past to see what increased competition does. Gamepass has been increasing its attractiveness. In direct response to this, Sony changed their stance completely and put first party games on their sub a year after release. Xbox gamers win when MS increases GP attractiveness. Sony gamers win when PS+ gets better. That's the whole theory of competition benefiting consumers.

I am pretty sure Sony has put first-party games on PS+ before they changed to the new tiers.

Go ahead and laugh again. You guys can keep being wrong for all I care.

If people disagree with you, that does not mean they are laughing at you. They might just disagree.

 

[DrFigs]

I never really liked this whole gaming thing anyway. i'm more of a movie guy

 

[SteelCurtain 59]

Has anyone answered this? Maybe I'm just very stupid but how does buying a publisher create more competition when we know good and well that they're going to push 99% of their products as exclusive?

There's competition between Xbox/playstation/Nintendo and there's competition between devs/all video games. It objectively is super helpful to the first competition as it allows Xbox to be more competitive with PlayStation/Nintendo. It hurts the second type of competition as you said. So it just depends on what angle of competition you care about more. Personally I think Xbox being close to the others is more important because it brings the best out of all 3 which is ideal for gamers, even if it means some more exclusives. But I understand valuing the other type of competition more and neither argument is wrong

 

[IntentionalPun]

The CMA really fucked up their math and MS sort of embarrassed them on it. Doesn't mean they'll pass it through though there is still the cloud gaming considerations.

Has anyone answered this? Maybe I'm just very stupid but how does buying a publisher create more competition when we know good and well that they're going to push 99% of their products as exclusive?

Read the submissions sent to the CMA by 3rd parties.

Some 3rd parties want Xbox to be more competitive, because right now in the hardcore "high end" home console space Sony being so dominant is not some boon for 3rd parties.

There were no 3rd party submissions against the acquisition for these reasons, other than Sony.

For 3rd parties not named Sony COD being exclusive to Xbox (which for quite some time won't happen) would be good for them, and increase their ability to compete overall

 

[Topher]

Same shit I said from day one, but you guys just laugh and only listen to people who agree with you. Do you think it's normal for one of the 3 consoles to just be a laughing stock on here? "Xbox has no games." This is the argument and constant slander from vocal Sony fans. It's pretty obvious logic that if they have a more attractive offer for gamers, that means people are more likely to give their ecosystem a chance.

That is increased competition right there. Sony is utterly dominant right now. They raised the price of games and their system and the sales just went up. They're a juggernaut.

Furthermore, you can literally just look at the recent past to see what increased competition does. Gamepass has been increasing its offerings. In direct response to this, Sony changed their stance completely and put first party games on their sub a year after release. Xbox gamers win when MS increases GP improves. Sony gamers win when PS+ gets better. That's the whole theory of competition benefiting consumers.

Go ahead and laugh again. You guys can keep being wrong for all I care.

"You guys" won. Remember?

 

[DryvBy]

Is this what you do? You just ask one question after another because you hate the answers? I can answer that one too. Has to do with decisions last gen, the difficulty of starting new studios and the time that takes, and the increased cost and development time associated with AAA games.

I'm curious what you think. Why are so offensive? Is it because you can't think of a non-fanboy reason?

There's 2 more for you too.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Read the submissions sent to the CMA by 3rd parties.

Some 3rd parties want Xbox to be more competitive, because right now in the hardcore "high end" home console space Sony being so dominant is not some boon for 3rd parties.

There were no 3rd party submissions against the acquisition for these reasons.

Name the 3rd parties.

We've been here before.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Same shit I said from day one, but you guys just laugh and only listen to people who agree with you. Do you think it's normal for one of the 3 consoles to just be a laughing stock on here? "Xbox has no games." This is the argument and constant slander from vocal Sony fans. It's pretty obvious logic that if they have a more attractive offer for gamers, that means people are more likely to give their ecosystem a chance.

That is increased competition right there. Sony is utterly dominant right now. They raised the price of games and their system and the sales just went up. They're a juggernaut.

Furthermore, you can literally just look at the recent past to see what increased competition does. Gamepass has been increasing its offerings. In direct response to this, Sony changed their stance completely and put first party games on their sub a year after release. Xbox gamers win when MS increases GP improves. Sony gamers win when PS+ gets better. That's the whole theory of competition benefiting consumers.

Go ahead and laugh again. You guys can keep being wrong for all I care.

So Microsoft can't compete by making their existing studios better and growing their existing studios?

They aren't some minor player with limited resources who is a new entrant into the industry. They now span 4 console generations and have been in operation for nearly 25 years.

Why do they need to buy Activision to be competitive?

 

[IntentionalPun]

Name the 3rd parties.

We've been here before.

Why is that relevant?

They were anonymous IIRC.

Either way, the logic is sound.. read my edit.. the majority of the market doesn't give 2 shits if COD is made exclusive, it would only benefit them. Just sort of how it works.

The argument is just pretty simple.. right now Sony is so dominant that giving an edge to Xbox increases competition overall.. that's it.

Now does Sony deserve to be dominant? I think so.. does MS? No.. but that's not how the law works.. they are allowed to buy shit as long as they aren't creating a monopoly or unduly harming a competitor.. and they really aren't, Sony can afford to lose COD and then some.

 

[Punished Miku]

I'm curious what you think. Why are so offensive? Is it because you can't think of a non-fanboy reason?

There's 2 more for you too.

Okayyyyy lol. Guess I read your intentions correctly.

 

[TheGodfather07]

What happens if Microsoft still can't compete after this? Who's next?

 

[DeepEnigma]

Why is that relevant?

They were anonymous IIRC.

Either way, the logic is sound.. read my edit.. the majority of the market doesn't give 2 shits if COD is made exclusive, it would only benefit them. Just sort of how it works.

It is plenty relevant. One that was revealed was basically a MS second party studio, the other 5 could have been all the same as well. It is relevant when we know the intentions of said sources.

 

[adamsapple]

Name the 3rd parties.

We've been here before.

You want the names of the anonymous commenters ? doesn't that defeat the purpose of them wanting to stay anonymous ?

also if you're going to say all 5 were MS subsidiaries, that's on CMA to filter out and not make those results public then. Avoid an obvious conflict of interest. I'm gonna assume they did the bare minimum and at least made sure they weren't doing that.

 

[Kilau]

"You guys" won. Remember?

People online were saying mean things about a game console. Words hurt, my dude.

 

[Ozriel]

Sony just needs to PR "10 year deals," what's the issue?

And that works just fine. Sign legally binding 10 year deals to put the content on other consoles. Same behavioral remedies MS offered. Deal enforceable by the EU…throw in a parity clause too.

What, you think I'd have an issue with that?

 

[SEGAvangelist]

What happens if Microsoft still can't compete after this? Who's next?

Hopefully SEGA.

 

[DeepEnigma]

You want the names of the anonymous commenters ? doesn't that defeat the purpose of them wanting to stay anonymous ?

Convenient.

 

[splattered]

All acquisitions "go to the regulators".

Sony buying Capcom or Square would be a wet fart in comparison to Activision. It'd go through without any issues whatsoever. Take 2, same deal, especially now that MS has Activision and Bethesda

Probably yeah, but it will take any of these companies WANTING to be bought for us to even get to that point in the first place.

 

[adamsapple]

Convenient.

No, logical, lol.

"Anonymous".

 

[IntentionalPun]

It is plenty relevant. One that was revealed was basically a MS second party studio, the other 5 could have been all the same as well. It is relevant when we know the intentions of said sources.

Who were the names of the non-Sony 3rd parties against the deal?

There weren't any.. is that not relevant?

Either way it's just basic math.. read my edits lol

 

[DeepEnigma]

No, logical, lol.

"Anonymous".

Convenient. As convenient as this,

One leading antitrust lawyer said: "This is a very unusual development. In CMA-era cases, there has only been one other occurrence of 'updated' provisional findings that I'm aware of." "

This is extremely unusual," said an ex-CMA lawyer. "Restating your provisional findings is something you would rather die than do."

 

[Oddvintagechap]

No... Microsoft, Tencent, Embracer can... i guess Sony could take out a loan from Elon Musk? But i'd be scared of what he'd want in return...

You know Elon took out a loan for Twitter?

Apparently Sony can join a bidding war for 21 Century Fox but can't buy Capcom.

So you think Blizzard - who has been run by Ybarra, an ex-Xbox high level employee - are going to "leave" Microsoft post acquisition? Really?

Which one do you think is? One of the COD support studios? This Ybarra dude sounds like he has a history of leaving MS.

 

[Riky]

I'm pretty sure Nintendo wouldn't be too thrilled at seeing Sony buy Capcom and/or Square. Neither would Microsoft, for that matter. It'd go to regulators. Ditto for an attempt at Take Two.

"You allowed Microsoft buy a $69 billion publisher so you have to allow us buy a cheaper publisher" isn't exactly a winning argument. Mindshare, marketshare etc arguments will come into play.

I guess we'll see what happens.

Yeah there is no way if Xbox was market leader this would go through, so I doubt the market leader buying Take 2 would be allowed, it would almost certainly be blocked.

 

[DryvBy]

Okayyyyy lol. Guess I read your intentions correctly.

It's not a difficult question, my guy.

"I have no idea what I'm talking about" is ok to say because that's the impression I'm getting. Is there not a piece of literature on how to answer basic questions from MS Twitter or something?

There's another question. I'm just going to ask you something every time you reply.

 

[TheGodfather07]

Hopefully SEGA.

Sega won't change shit. Microsoft go for the big dogs. Take two or EA.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

Yeah there is no way if Xbox was market leader this would go through, so I doubt the market leader buying Take 2 would be allowed, it would almost certainly be blocked.

Why would it be blocked? Take 2 is a fraction of the size of Activision, and Microsoft now just got a lot bigger by acquiring them.

This is total nonsense lol

 

[adamsapple]

Convenient. As convenient as this,

It's as convenient or as difficult as CMA want it to be. They're the regulatory body and its their deductions that first led them to believe MS will foreclose and now to say MS will not foreclose.

But you're using a obvious strawman here. None of that has anything to do with any publisher/developer wanting to stay anonymous when citing their support for the acquisition.

 

[Demon2blades]

I mean there's so many ways to go on this. It could just be an old school straight up cash in envelopes kind of bribe. Or it could be Microsoft is about to announce a blockbuster Azure deal with the UK.

Obviously Microsoft was applying a ton of pressure on the UK over this. Maybe they just got tired of the constant and unyielding pressure and caved.

Of course they did ms are masters of pr and even started to make it political but Sony didn't help themselves being quite about the whole thing either , it is what it is I guess .

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

[

Why would it be blocked? Take 2 is a fraction of the size of Activision, and Microsoft now just got a lot bigger by acquiring them.

This is total nonsense lol

This is total nonsense lol

 

[DeepEnigma]

It's as convenient or as difficult as CMA want it to be. They're the regulatory body and its their deductions that first led them to believe MS will foreclose and now to say MS will not foreclose.

But you're using a obvious strawman here. None of that has anything to do with any publisher/developer wanting to stay anonymous when citing their support for the acquisition.

Ok.

 

[adamsapple]

Ok.

I'm glad we see eye to eye on that, thanks.

 

[Riky]

Why would it be blocked? Take 2 is a fraction of the size of Activision, and Microsoft now just got a lot bigger by acquiring them.

This is total nonsense lol

It's the relative position of the buyer that matters in a monopolies consideration, simple.

 

[TheGodfather07]

CMA actually did a total 180! I told you guys Microsoft would make an offer they couldn't refuse. Approve it or a bullet to the back of the head.

 

[Ozriel]

All acquisitions "go to the regulators".

Sony buying Capcom or Square would be a wet fart in comparison to Activision. It'd go through without any issues whatsoever. Take 2, same deal, especially now that MS has Activision and Bethesda

You genuinely believe EU and CMA would ask Nintendo for thoughts on Sony buying Square and Capcom and they'd respond with no objections? Or Microsoft wouldn't object to try to force through behavioral concessions?

MS having Activision and Bethesda will likely not dramatically change the console marketshare picture in Europe/Uk, especially if Sony signs the deal for COD content and feature parity for 10 years. We won't see Day 1 COD on Gamepass until 2025 at the earliest.

 

[Mr.ODST]

If it goes through won't Sony be forced to sign the deal for COD or risk pote tially losing it?

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

It's the relative position of the buyer that matters in a monopolies consideration, simple.

Sony is not a monopoly if they acquire Take 2.

Take 2 doesn't put out a game every single year, have far fewer studios, and has much lesser industry impact than Activision with their yearly releases, Blizzard, and King component.

 

[Topher]

If it goes through won't Sony be forced to sign the deal for COD or risk pote tially losing it?

How/why would Sony be "forced" to sign anything?

 

[DrFigs]

You genuinely believe EU and CMA would ask Nintendo for thoughts on Sony buying Square and Capcom and they'd respond with no objections? Or Microsoft wouldn't object to try to force through behavioral concessions?

MS having Activision and Bethesda will likely not dramatically change the console marketshare picture in Europe/Uk, especially if Sony signs the deal for COD content and feature parity for 10 years. We won't see Day 1 COD on Gamepass until 2025 at the earliest.

somehow i think sony buying capcom would affect marketshares even less

 

[splattered]

If it goes through won't Sony be forced to sign the deal for COD or risk pote tially losing it?

No they wouldn't lose it because Microsoft will want PS revenue, but they could negotiate a more lucrative relationship with Microsoft offering console specific perks for their own PS users. I would if i was Sony...

 

[adamsapple]

How/why would Sony be "forced" to sign anything?

They wouldn't. But maybe irrespective of their involvement, CMA/EU may ask MS to sign a 10 year guarantee of release and parity on Sony platforms to approve the deal.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

You genuinely believe EU and CMA would ask Nintendo for thoughts on Sony buying Square and Capcom and they'd respond with no objections? Or Microsoft wouldn't object to try to force through behavioral concessions?

MS having Activision and Bethesda will likely not dramatically change the console marketshare picture in Europe/Uk, especially if Sony signs the deal for COD content and feature parity for 10 years. We won't see Day 1 COD on Gamepass until 2025 at the earliest.

Sony acquiring Capcom or Square would not significantly change their competitor's prospects. Both studios are each less than 1/10th the market cap of Activision.

 

[Ozriel]

CMA actually did a total 180! I told you guys Microsoft would make an offer they couldn't refuse.

If only NVIDiA knew they just had to flash cash at regulators to get the ARM deal approved, eh?

Seriously, though, these posts are nonsense. They've detailed why exactly they've reconsidered their position, and the maths checks out.

Mid last year, half this forum was filled with people saying the 'corrupt FTC' would approve the deal on an accelerated timeframe. Look where we are today.

 

[Oddvintagechap]

Yeah there is no way if Xbox was market leader this would go through, so I doubt the market leader buying Take 2 would be allowed, it would almost certainly be blocked.

Problem isn't being the Market leader, rather it's MS is one of the big 5 tech companies that also has a history of monopolizing tendencies.

If Sony were to go for T2, they might as well sell their shares in Epic games and Scopely. Sony's biggest worry would be if Amazon is interested.

 

[Topher]

They wouldn't. But maybe irrespective of their involvement, CMA/EU may ask MS to sign a 10 year guarantee of release and parity on Sony platforms to approve the deal.

I don't think that is even going to happen at this point. EU is supposedly only concerned about cloud gaming competition. CMA says this deal won't SLC. So why are any concessions needed for Sony at all?

 

[lh032]

Its more likely jimbo going to announce the acquisition of below :
1) some new indie studio formed by the janitor of ex-company or whatsoever

2) 1000 workforce support studio for horizon franchise

 

[Riky]

Sony is not a monopoly if they acquire Take 2.

Take 2 doesn't put out a game every single year, have far fewer studios, and has much lesser industry impact than Activision with their yearly releases, Blizzard, and King component.

I think it would be seen as an attempt to be one, GTA would fall under all the same scrutiny as Call Of Duty. Like I said if Xbox was market leader then this would be blocked but they are a distant third and Blizzard/King actually have no impact on that.
The market leader who already has made several franchises exclusive from third parties would be blocked I'm sure.

 

[Demon2blades]

You genuinely believe EU and CMA would ask Nintendo for thoughts on Sony buying Square and Capcom and they'd respond with no objections? Or Microsoft wouldn't object to try to force through behavioral concessions?

Why? Sony would just offer Nintendo and all those with concerns the world famous 10 year deal then bosh ! Just like this acquisition it's done that's how it seems to me .

I thought According to the CMA Nintendo isn't a competitor in the same market ? .

 

[Ozriel]

Sony acquiring Capcom or Square would not significantly change their competitor's prospects. Both studios are each less than 1/10th the market cap of Activision.

That's irrelevant.
It could significantly impact Nintendo in Japan, for example, and regulators would look at marketshare and market position of the purchasing party, as well as the mindshare around their games.

Behavioral remedies would be recommended.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I thought According to the CMA Nintendo isn't a competitor in the same market ? .

Oooh, forgot about that zinger too.

A car is a car.