Support NeoGAF

[Topher]

Yes studios make a game. And that is not enough to sell and/or maintain a game.
Point made was everything at Activision Blizzard is interwoven with COD and that is true.

Facts say otherwise.

 

[Gone]

This merger does not need to happen in order for you to get CoD or Diablo into Gamepass. Heck, MS could, the day after this deal dies, sign a 10 year subscription exclusivity deal with ATVI for their entire slate.

There are loads of games MS has made deals with for day 1 GP inclusion that they did not buy, at all funding levels.

Or ir can happen because it's a good business opportunity for the company to diversify its revenue from games and subscription services.

 

[reksveks]

Re how intertwined COD is to the rest of the business.

Given that ABK is now open to selling COD on Steam, the real question is how easily could A switch to a new user account system that's different to the battle.net based on (if they have or want to). Imo for a company generating the revenue and profits that they would be, relatively easily.

 

[Gone]

But what if that platform is the only option?

That's the point the regulators are making with COD.

There's nothing wrong with it being on gamepass and it still can be even if this deal doesn't go through.

It's not tho.

They just signed a 10 year deal to keep it on Steam and Nintendo and offered Sony the same or even a 15 years contract..

 

[demigod]

Except they're not removing it..

They can sign the 10 or 15 years contract and be done with it.

But Sony paying for Final Fantasy, Deathloop and others is okay because they're the little innocent good guys, right?

Microsoft…..has…..exclusive……deals…..too. But go ahead and point to evil Sony only.

 

[Drell]

Good thing the industry have a million publishers and studios.

So Sony can do all that because what? They're the good guys who look out for gamers?

There's no good guys, only corporations. It's just that one of them has multiple monopolies, an endless bank account and want to disrupt the market because it can't compete fairly like the others on the same market.

 

[demigod]

Before the regulators started talking, the discourse was that Microsoft would never remove cod because of the money left on the table.

Now though, a certain set of forumites have changed their tune and at the first opportunity Microsoft are going to remove cod.

What happened to all the money getting left on the table?

Let’s see the receipts to back up your claim. Let me guess, you don’t have them.

 

[Gone]

There's no good guys, only corporations. It's just that one of them has multiple monopolies, an endless bank account and want to disrupt the market because it can't compete fairly like the others on the same market.

Sony became what it is today in the gaming market because they competed fairly?
Is this a joke?

Just read about how Sony became what it is today especially in the early days of them entering the gaming market.

 

[Dick Jones]

Sony became what it is today in the gaming market because they competed fairly?
Is this a joke?

Just read about how Sony became what it is today especially in the early days of them entering the gaming market.

I doubt you want to talk about corporations in the 90s acting fairly. It mightn't go well for you

 

[Drell]

Sony became what it is today in the gaming market because they competed fairly?
Is this a joke?

Just read about how Sony became what it is today especially in the early days of them entering the gaming market.

Psygnosis in 1994 weren't in the same ball park as Activision is with CoD these days. If Sony started its console business by buying Capcom, Konami, Square or Namco back then, then we would have a similarity.

 

[Sanepar]

A world where not everybody is a blind fanboy warrior that cant see the hidden lines in things and cant think two stepps ahead of something to see what the future may look like if some things fall into place ... goody goody MS is buying COD so you can have free/cheap ABK games for life... believe that all you want but not everybody got shit for brains

I would never understand fanboy's need to defend a corp that wants your money.

What we should ask and fight for is high quality games. Not to cheer a fucking corp.

 

[Sanepar]

Except they're not removing it..

They can sign the 10 or 15 years contract and be done with it.

But Sony paying for Final Fantasy, Deathloop and others is okay because they're the little innocent good guys, right?

How can u compare ff or deathloop with cod? Really? Ff can't sell even 2-3 million on xbox. Deathloop didn't sell even 1 million.

 

[Satansblade]

Same.

I haven't heard anything about the CMA letting Microsoft keep COD. Would definitely like to see the source if true.



Time to deliver if you got proof of this. Its a pretty big breakthrough in my opinion. If it's inside information maybe you should have a mod vet it.

https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/2/2...vision-blizzard-acquisition-eu-approval-rumor


Reuters good enough for you? Where did I say I had inside info? You guys really, really want to pretend this deal isn't happening. It's getting desperate at this point.

 

[Topher]

https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/2/2...vision-blizzard-acquisition-eu-approval-rumor


Reuters good enough for you? Where did I say I had inside info? You guys really, really want to pretend this deal isn't happening. It's getting desperate at this point.

No one is pretending anything. Factually, the deal is still in doubt and no one can predict the future. Your guesses are just as good as anyone else's, but that is all they are: guesses.

And that link is referencing the EU, not CMA.

From that same article:

"That’s a contrast to the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), which offered up possible remedies last month that include Microsoft being forced to sell off Activision Blizzard’s business associated with Call of Duty."

 

[reinking]

https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/2/2...vision-blizzard-acquisition-eu-approval-rumor


Reuters good enough for you? Where did I say I had inside info? You guys really, really want to pretend this deal isn't happening. It's getting desperate at this point.

I have always thought the deal was happening. That being said, everyone seems to have lost their minds and forgot that the CMA exists.

From your link....

That’s a contrast to the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), which offered up possible remedies last month that include Microsoft being forced to sell off Activision Blizzard’s business associated with Call of Duty.

 

[Satansblade]

They don't even need to drop out of the UK tho. Just simply not act as one company. MS and then whatever owns Activision. Every

Anti-consumer, at what point does something go from doing business to being anti-consumer.

Is HBO buying the rights to a movie and showing it exclusively on its platform it?

Is coca cola being exclusive at McDonalds it?

Is Sony paying for exclusivity it?

Is taking access from a millions of fans from a $500 console but then adding access to potentially anyone with a capable device, it?

Most of these things do have anti-consumer aspects but it's not just black and white. There's a threshold to be met and I guess the world's courts will decide at the end of the day.

Anything that isn't a direct benefit to Sony is "Anti-competitive" to a group in this thread. It's gotten so transparent, they might become ghosts.

Sony has been doing exactly what MS is for decades now, just on a smaller scale. As soon as MS does, they are up in arms. Half of them are the same ones praying Sony buys Square, and are glad about exclusivity deals. The hypocrisy couldn't be worse.

The FTC hasn't won a case in years (against far bigger conglomerates, including banks), so they certainly can't prove MS would have any sort of monopoly. The CMA is going to approve it, Sony went too far trying to block this, allowing no acceptable terms. I'm guessing they make MS promise 10 years multiplatform, as they promised.

 

[reinking]

Anything that isn't a direct benefit to Sony is "Anti-competitive" to a group in this thread. It's gotten so transparent, they might become ghosts.

Sony has been doing exactly what MS is for decades now, just on a smaller scale. As soon as MS does, they are up in arms. Half of them are the same ones praying Sony buys Square, and are glad about exclusivity deals. The hypocrisy couldn't be worse.

The FTC hasn't won a case in years (against far bigger conglomerates, including banks), so they certainly can't prove MS would have any sort of monopoly. The CMA is going to approve it, Sony went too far trying to block this, allowing no acceptable terms. I'm guessing they make MS promise 10 years multiplatform, as they promised.

Why do some of you pretend that every purchase is equal? MS just bought Bethesda with not much opposition. Not even Sony fanboys got too loud about it.

 

[MasterCornholio]

It's not tho.

They just signed a 10 year deal to keep it on Steam and Nintendo and offered Sony the same or even a 15 years contract..

The problem is that you said its a 10 year contract. That's something that bothers the CMA and consumers. If it was permanent it would be a different story. But Microsoft only offered 10 years.

 

[MasterCornholio]

https://www.theverge.com/2023/3/2/2...vision-blizzard-acquisition-eu-approval-rumor


Reuters good enough for you? Where did I say I had inside info? You guys really, really want to pretend this deal isn't happening. It's getting desperate at this point.

Why do you believe the EU = The CMA?

The EC and the CMA are two different groups of regulators. One represent the European Union while the other represents The United Kingdom. Ever since brexit the UK isn't a part of the EU anymore.

So again what's your source on the CMA?

The CMA is about to approve the deal on MS's promise not to wall up CoD for 10 years. The CMA will not be blocking this, and the FTC definitely cannot win this in court.

From your source that you provided me.

The European Commission is reportedly unlikely to demand that Microsoft sell any Activision Blizzard assets as a condition of regulatory approval. That’s a contrast to the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), which offered up possible remedies last month that include Microsoft being forced to sell off Activision Blizzard’s business associated with Call of Duty.

 

[Iced Arcade]

Same.

I haven't heard anything about the CMA letting Microsoft keep COD. Would definitely like to see the source if true.



Time to deliver if you got proof of this. Its a pretty big breakthrough in my opinion. If it's inside information maybe you should have a mod vet it.

Holster your weapon corn. I think you probably read that wrong.

Sounded like a throw away opinion statement no different then when someone says "deals dead"

 

[MasterCornholio]

Holster your weapon corn. I think you probably read that wrong.

Sounded like a throw away opinion statement no different then when someone says "deals dead"

After his response I doubt that.

As for if the deal is dead. Well it depends on how badly Microsoft wants COD. I have no idea where this is going at this point. What I do know is that the process isn't as smooth as it was thought to be.

There's no weapon here. I'm just wondering why he uses that Reuters article as proof that the CMA will approve the deal especially after the CMA already gave us their opinion on it.

Even the article makes it very clear on the difference between the CMA and the EC.

 

[Iced Arcade]

After his responses I think it's obvious he didn't have an inside source lol

 

[MasterCornholio]

After his responses I think it's obvious he didn't have an inside source lol

Pretty much. I read it as a WTF kind of post. I always give a chance for people to prove themselves. No idea how he came to that conclusion from the Reuters article.

Sorry about my reaction to your response though.

 

[Gone]

The problem is that you said its a 10 year contract. That's something that bothers the CMA and consumers. If it was permanent it would be a different story. But Microsoft only offered 10 years.

Microsoft isn't crazy to sign something more. It's the longest binding contract in the industry history.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Microsoft isn't crazy to sign something more. It's the longest binding contract in the industry history.

Still not long enough.

That's what she CMA said.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Microsoft isn't crazy to sign something more. It's the longest binding contract in the industry history.

Maybe Microsoft is crazy for not signing something that's longer. It's what the CMA wants. Remember they are willing to pay over 70 billion for this.

 

[Iced Arcade]

Pretty much. I read it as a WTF kind of post. I always give a chance for people to prove themselves. No idea how he came to that conclusion from the Reuters article.

Sorry about my reaction to your response though.

All good! I'm just lazing reading before I set my PS5 to my upstairs TV.

Just had another daughter on the March 9th so taking this time to catch up on some games.

 

[Gone]

Maybe Microsoft is crazy for not signing something that's longer. It's what the CMA wants. Remember they are willing to pay over 70 billion for this.

The CMA is wrong then.

No matter how you look at it, they're only insuring the current status quo with Sony being the market leader continues with them blocking this deal.

 

[MasterCornholio]

All good! I'm just lazing reading before I set my PS5 to my upstairs TV.

Just had another daughter on the March 9th so taking this time to catch up on some games.

Well damn...

To be honest this whole deal is just confusing to me. I honestly want this to be over with soon no matter which way it goes.

I need to get back to Sekiro. Love it so far but it's very different from any Souls game that I've played.

 

[MasterCornholio]

The CMA is wrong then.

No matter how you look at it, they're only insuring the current status quo with Sony being the market leader continues with them blocking this deal.

Maybe your wrong then.

If the CMA is wrong and unjust Microsoft can always fight that. But unlike the FTC they seem to have done their research. Also its pretty clear that it isn't about protecting Sony.

Could it be possible thet you don't like Sony because they are the market leader?

There's always one in any market so it isn't unusual.

 

[DrFigs]

On the long run, that deal would harm consumers, even Xbox users. All the money MS is wasting now would be paid by you. They're in for big profits, they're not your friend. Like on Netflix, price would gradually go up and quality would gradually go down.

The idea that consumers will pay less when publishers get bought left and right is idiotic. No cartel or monopoly has ever benefited customers.

They'll pay less only at first, then they'll pay a lot more. That's what's hilarious about all those people cheerleading for MS trying to buy the market and get a monopoly here. They don't understand they're digging their own grave.

My experience in this thread has been that MS fans think that it's unlikely that Microsoft will raise the price of gamepass (seemingly ever). Which is like the main argument against monopolies, that they can use their market power to raise prices. It's impossible to argue against people who think gamepass is profitable or that it helps game sales, so that Microsoft has no incentive to raise prices. The latter argument is not as popular as it used to be.

 

[Cheezewizz]

I was talking about the option to play it on PlayStation.

Nice goalpost move.

 

[Cheezewizz]

There's no good guys, only corporations. It's just that one of them has multiple monopolies, an endless bank account and want to disrupt the market because it can't compete fairly like the others on the same market.

Fanboy drivel at it's finest.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Nice goalpost move.

Well you told me that Microsoft could always get it on gamepass. Once Microsoft owns Activision they can limit the platforms its available on.

Not sure how that's a goal post move since you suggested the idea to me.

 

[Ronin_7]

Maybe your wrong then.

If the CMA is wrong and unjust Microsoft can always fight that. But unlike the FTC they seem to have done their research. Also its pretty clear that it isn't about protecting Sony.

Could it be possible thet you don't like Sony because they are the market leader?

There's always one in any market so it isn't unusual.

It's almost impossible to fight the CMA, here's how it works:

1. You sue the CMA to CAT & you'll get a trial and a decision some months or years after.

2. CAT barely goes against the CMA.

3. IF MS wins which is unlikely, the process goes to CMA again which will have the power again.

 

[MasterCornholio]

It's almost impossible to fight the CMA, here's how it works:

1. You sue the CMA to CAT & you'll get a trial and a decision some months or years after.

2. CAT barely goes against the CMA.

3. IF MS wins which is unlikely, the process goes to CMA again which will have the power again.

I believe you have to prove the CMA of wrong doing to get it overturned. Like for example providing evidence that Sony bribed them. Something along those lines.

 

[Heisenberg007]

All good! I'm just lazing reading before I set my PS5 to my upstairs TV.

Just had another daughter on the March 9th so taking this time to catch up on some games.

Congratulations!

 

[X-Wing]

The CMA is wrong then.

No matter how you look at it, they're only insuring the current status quo with Sony being the market leader continues with them blocking this deal.

You are delusional.

 

[Heisenberg007]

I believe you have to prove the CMA of wrong doing to get it overturned. Like for example providing evidence that Sony bribed them. Something along those lines.

It can also work in case the CMA didn't follow proper procedures. And do you know what could be an example of improper procedures? Blocking the deal right away without giving Microsoft to option to propose behavioral remedies first.

This, I believe, is one of the main reasons why they even mentioned the possibility and gave the time to MS to submit behavioral remedies.

Now they can decide that these behavioral remedies are not good enough (they are still the same 10-year deals as before) and can move further with prohibition in the absence of divestment.

 

[Gone]

Maybe your wrong then.

If the CMA is wrong and unjust Microsoft can always fight that. But unlike the FTC they seem to have done their research. Also its pretty clear that it isn't about protecting Sony.

Could it be possible thet you don't like Sony because they are the market leader?

There's always one in any market so it isn't unusual.

If they have done their research, then the only logical way to move forward is to approve the deal after the guaranties Microsoft offered. There's no world in which they don't approve the deal unless they're protecting Sony.

 

[Drell]

Fanboy drivel at it's finest.

So? Tell me how what I said is wrong?

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

So? Tell me how what I said is wrong?

like 90% of it.

 

[Cheezewizz]

Anything that isn't a direct benefit to Sony is "Anti-competitive" to a group in this thread. It's gotten so transparent, they might become ghosts.

Sony has been doing exactly what MS is for decades now, just on a smaller scale. As soon as MS does, they are up in arms. Half of them are the same ones praying Sony buys Square, and are glad about exclusivity deals. The hypocrisy couldn't be worse.

The FTC hasn't won a case in years (against far bigger conglomerates, including banks), so they certainly can't prove MS would have any sort of monopoly. The CMA is going to approve it, Sony went too far trying to block this, allowing no acceptable terms. I'm guessing they make MS promise 10 years multiplatform, as they promised.

It was entertaining for awhile, and still is at times. My personal favorite is after a few pages of the same users echoing each other, they then proclaim things such as the last couple of pages show just how out of touch some people are, or that people are having meltdowns. As though it wasn't themselves making all the posts.

This same group of people repeatedly state that the deal is dead, and that the CMA has already basically killed the deal outside of anything but divestiture. Others will confirm this as though it were fact, either by like or quote.

Of course once someone says that the deal will pass, they wholesale mob the person with passive aggressive ban attempts by demanding a source and claiming they were pretending to be an insider.

It is what it is though. It's the reason why that particular group of fanboys is the laughingstock of gaming the same way Apple fanboys are.

 

[MasterCornholio]

It can also work in case the CMA didn't follow proper procedures. And do you know what could be an example of improper procedures? Blocking the deal right away without giving Microsoft to option to propose behavioral remedies first.

This, I believe, is one of the main reasons why they even mentioned the possibility and gave the time to MS to submit behavioral remedies.

Now they can decide that these behavioral remedies are not good enough (they are still the same 10-year deals as before) and can move further with prohibition in the absence of divestment.

I believe it was Phase 1 where they allowed Microsoft to propose behavioral remedies to their concerns. In Phase 2 the CMA came up with possible solutions and Microsoft has to accept one of them.

What I'm not sure is possible is if the CMA will do a 180 on their decision.

 

[Cheezewizz]

Well you told me that Microsoft could always get it on gamepass. Once Microsoft owns Activision they can limit the platforms its available on.

Not sure how that's a goal post move since you suggested the idea to me.

Check who said what before replying there bud.

 

[MasterCornholio]

If they have done their research, then the only logical way to move forward is to approve the deal after the guaranties Microsoft offered. There's no world in which they don't approve the deal unless they're protecting Sony.

Why do you believe those remedies are good enough for the CMA?

Also what evidence is there that they are protecting Sony?

 

[Cheezewizz]

So? Tell me how what I said is wrong?

How about you list all these "multiple monopolies" and find out for yourself.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Check who said what before replying there bud.

Oh so you don't believe it's possible. My mistake then.

 

[gothmog]

It's not tho.

They just signed a 10 year deal to keep it on Steam and Nintendo and offered Sony the same or even a 15 years contract..

Steam did not sign a deal.

 

[Drell]

How about you list all these "multiple monopolies" and find out for yourself.

PC OS and Productivity Softwares.

Maybe there's some others but these 2 are the most obvious.