• 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)

Do you believe the deal will be approved?


  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pelta88

Member
Ahh of course, how was that?

CADE are corrupt, no matter how well they argue, their decision is not valid.

Chile Commission? third world country. They don't even know how to read.

Japan? They don't know anything about Xbox, their decision is baseless.

Saudi Commission? country of terrorists its decision is invalid.

Other countries? they don't deserve to be mentioned...

EU Commission? they are fools sold to MS, let's celebrate Brexit... CMA is the example of a serious regulator because...

The question is who is being more irrational in their decision and, clearly, that here has been left only to the subjectivity of each one.

XBOX has little to no presence in the markets you've listed. Which makes the calculation there vastly different to the ones drawn up here.

Secondly, you sound like an alt account.
 

wolffy66

Member
It is pro consumer and it would be good if this didn't have the 10 year thing and also pushed to all publishers. The publisher gets it's money when I buy a copy (license), the publisher shouldn't them be able to block me from using my license on something like geforce now.
It's awkward in practice but yeah.

Why should games be the only content we are locked into consuming on one device?

If I buy a movie I can watch on any capable device. Same for music.

Games, like I said, would be a little more awkward but if you buy COD on one platform and its available to be played on another, you shouldn't have to buy it again.
 

hlm666

Member
That would probably bother the Gforce or whoever more than MS tho wouldn't it?
I think nvidia would appreciate not having to chase down permission from everyone. When geforce now started you linked your steam account and could play everything in your library. Once it got to a point where it was a very viable option to play streaming, publishers started making nvidia block games in your steam account. So this screwed over nvidia, but it also screwed over me (and the general consumer) because now a game I bought and have a license for nvidia has to get a license so I can use my game on their service. It's a good remedy for the consumer but the time limit needs to be killed and it has to be pushed to all publishers ideally.
 

Bernoulli

M2 slut
jcaNCM5.jpg




 

Dane

Member
There's a ton of reasons why this deal is dangerous to gaming. They just settled on the most solid one.
What dangers? They were rebutted at their wrong calculations so they moved goalposts, its clear from day one just like FTC they wanted it dead.

They always had cloud as a concern.

But you probably followed people on twitter that told you what you wanted to here.
The concern for a new market that they are willing give the license to tons of games to small companies for 10 years? That would give them a start to the fifth gear

They saw the bullshit from a mile away. 🤷‍♀️
Like EU did with CMA
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Looks like Reuters was spot on the money both with the outcome and exact date of announcement.
 

Bojanglez

The Amiga Brotherhood
It's awkward in practice but yeah.

Why should games be the only content we are locked into consuming on one device?

If I buy a movie I can watch on any capable device. Same for music.

Games, like I said, would be a little more awkward but if you buy COD on one platform and its available to be played on another, you shouldn't have to buy it again.
In the long run, would Microsoft be incentivised to allow it to be available on non Microsoft platforms though? Without the deal, Activision would have no short term incentive to make the game available on cloud gaming platforms, in the longer term if the cloud market grows and starts to catch up, they would be incentivised to do deals regardless of the platform owner (multi-cloud, multi-OS, multi-model) but this deal would likely negate that future for Activision content.
 

Topher

Identifies as young
What dangers? They were rebutted at their wrong calculations so they moved goalposts, its clear from day one just like FTC they wanted it dead.


The concern for a new market that they are willing give the license to tons of games to small companies for 10 years? That would give them a start to the fifth gear

And at the end of those 10 years, Microsoft holds all the cards for cloud gaming and can make whatever changes they want. CMA ain't buying it, thankfully.
 
Anyone notice that the terms set by the EC seem to have expanded MS's original offer of just 10-year COD access to 10-year access of all ABK games? And before someone says "no it was always for all ABK games", Brad Smith himself came out shortly after the Nintendo offer was made public, that it was just for COD, i.e he was correcting misinterpretations at that time.

So, the expansion to all ABK (or specifically, Activision...though realistically this probably means Blizzard & King games as well) games seems like a concession which was stressed by the EC that Microsoft eventually accepted. Them providing free access to these BYOG cloud providers is also maybe telling, though maybe that was the case with the COD deals hence why MS would keep 100% of in-app purchases revenue (which is not how things are done in the console space, FWIW)?

Either way...just bringing this up 'cuz Senjutsu Sage just lost the bet 🤣
 

deriks

4-Time GIF/Meme God
Microsoft: I want some exclusive games maybe in the future, and for sure not CoD. I want the third party money
EU: not approved because of monopoly
MS: dude, read it again
EU: it's approved since CoD is not an Xbox exclusive
MS:
leighton meester sigh GIF
 

sainraja

Member
UK blocked it, it is dead, nothing has changed.
People can still hope... he surely is.

But this does swing the narrative back to what it was before the CMA; now we just need to reach the next milestone or surprise that MS might have before a new, slightly modified one develops. :D

I think MS was fine with the free cloud license, as long as they kept 100% of the microtransactions. Wasn't that the deal they had with all these providers already?
That is what it looks like the EC has agreed with and it is only for 10 yrs though or that is how I am understanding it.
 
Last edited:

FritzJ92

Member
And at the end of those 10 years, Microsoft holds all the cards for cloud gaming and can make whatever changes they want. CMA ain't buying it, thankfully.
That's not true. Sony can decide to push their AAA to the cloud and so can Nintendo. ACTV isn't needed to have a successful cloud business as we can currently see they don't offer their games on any cloud service now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom