Support NeoGAF

[Heisenberg007]

That’s not how it works.

They clearly state that they’re concerned about exclusivity if the deal is allowed. And state here that they’re not convinced MS separate offer to Sony fully assuages their concern. Elsewhere, they state MS can try to demonstrate how behavioral concessions will cover all the risks they outline.

MS position will be to tender the 10 years agreements drawn up with other parties, as well as the proposed 10 year deal with Sony. They’ll also be detailing enforcement and iron clad compliance guarantees. Which will include steep fines from the EU. I’ve also seen report that Microsoft is also volunteering to cover fees for a third party monitoring company that will monitor for compliance.

The concessions they’ll be putting forward to the CMA are dramatically different in scope and regulation…and that’s why there’s confidence in some circles that they will fly.


And now I await the inevitable LOL emojis

Your interpretation is incorrect. The CMA document states 3 things:

1) It acknowledges Microsoft's agreement with Nintendo (signed), Steam's, and PlayStation (didn't sign).
2) It then states Microsoft's past behavior and how the balance always turns out in favor of exclusivity.
3) It then states that, because of these aforementioned reasons, the CMA concludes that the Merged Entity will have enough incentive to use COD to foreclose PlayStation -- despite the agreements.

As far as behavioral access remedies go, these 10-year agreements of course are not adequate behavioral access remedies because, according to the CMA elsewhere in the document, is time limited.

Whatever behavioral access remedies Microsoft tries to convince CMA on will have to be similar in effect to the proposed structural remedies (primary), which in this case is divestment.

 

[Sanepar]

If MS next is Take2(really cheap for them) then I think ps will be in trouble.

 

[MasterCornholio]

Whatever behavioral access remedies Microsoft tries to convince CMA on will have to be similar in effect to the proposed structural remedies (primary), which in this case is divestment.

Not sure how that is possible. I don't think behavioral remedies can ever be equivalent to divestment. I did see some explanations but I still don't understand how its equivalent to a company operating by themselves.

 

[MasterCornholio]

If MS next is Take2(really cheap for them) then I think ps will be in trouble.

They have RDR and GTA though. That's going to be an issue especially with how many copies they sold.

Edit: #SonyToo BTW.

 

[Three]

Yeah, but how about Tony Hawk, Diablo, Warcraft, Starcraft and Overwatch? If the deal goes trough, we can have these games on Switch, Gamepass, Steam and major streaming services. Probably EGS too. And COD will still excist on PlayStation. There are only benefits with this deal.

There is absolutely no guarantee of this because the MS deal with steam is for CoD only which is already on steam anyway. I don't see why Activision wouldn't release on steam today for smaller games though like they have chosen to do for CoD. If anything MS might play that MS store exclusive game with specific titles like they do now.

There is also another value which Activision brings outside of revenue. It increases their console sales, which also brings more revenue.

For example, if activitision deal allows them to sell extra 20m consoles, that is extra revenue, which otherwise they wouldn't have been able to get it without them.
If each user spends up to 100$ a year for 10 years, that is extra $20b revenue.

Then you have to account gamepass increase and having more 3rd party supporting their system. That is extra revenue too.

MS can recoup those investment faster under 10-20 years.

That is true but I don't think your numbers are realistic. Removing your second largest market would make a significant dent to console sales, 3rd party support for the system and overall revenue. I think the 360 sold something like 8M+ in the UK. So expecting a 20M increase from this purchase in other regions like the EU, Japan, and US which wouldn't even have CoD exclusive is really pushing it.

CMA document data
"ABK is a game developer and publisher founded in 2008 and headquartered in
Santa Monica, California, US.16 ABK is publicly listed on Nasdaq. ABK’s global
turnover in the financial year 2021 was over £6 billion, of which approximately
£716 million was generated in the UK."

"Microsoft is a global technology company founded in 1975 and headquartered in Redmond, Washington, US.1 Microsoft is publicly listed on Nasdaq. Microsoft’s global turnover in the financial year 2021 was close to £125 billion, of which [] was generated in the UK."

If you assume that users value for that redacted number is correct at $5B you are talking almost a loss in revenue on a $70B expenditure.

A link to the legal document where the MS made this declaration to the EU please.

It's discussed some pages back. Look for Hiesenbergs gold post. It's in the EC documents. The actual formal notification is not public but it's contents are discussed in the EC document.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Not sure how that is possible. I don't think behavioral remedies can ever be equivalent to divestment. I did see some explanations but I still don't understand how its equivalent to a company operating by themselves.

I agree. That's why the CMA literally said that conditions in which behavioral remedies would apply are not present in this case.

Structural remedy: If Activision is divested, it will be an independent company that can publish Activision games (or COD) on any platform they want for however long they want to. They can also enter into partnerships and agreements, put their games on PS+, may choose to skip Game Pass, etc.

Behavioral remedy: The effects and end results would have to be similar for behavioral remedies to be considered and approved. So, first of all, COD in perpetuity available on PlayStation, not for 10 years. Then there wouldn't be a possibility of COD skipping Game Pass in favor of PS Plus. Also, the big issue would Cloud gaming, and the CMA literally pointed out why Cloud gaming will be a big issue for behavioral access remedies to work.

 

[POKEYCLYDE]

"Therefore, according to the Notifying Party, Microsoft would not have the incentive to cease or limit making ZeniMax titles available on other consoles."

I think people read that statement one way when it can be read multiple ways, especially when you take into account that they were talking about full and/or partial foreclosure.

Foreclosure of Zenimax games does mean exclusivity for Starfield, Redfall and Elder Scrolls, but it also means stop selling and supporting all Zenimax games on rival storefronts (Skyrim, Doom 2016/Eternal, Wolfenstein, Deathloop, GWT, ESO, FO76, etc.)

It's weasel wording and lawyer speak to say "We have no incentive to cease making Zenimax games available on other consoles." Because it can be read as "We will release games on other consoles moving forward." But it can also mean, and in Microsoft's view, probably does mean: "It doesn't make business sense to take Skyrim, ESO and FO76 off of rival consoles."

 

[feynoob]

That is true but I don't think your numbers are realistic. Removing your second largest market would make a significant dent to console sales, 3rd party support for the system and overall revenue. I think the 360 sold something like 8.4M in the UK. So expecting a 20M increase from this purchase in other regions like the EU, Japan, and US which wouldn't even have CoD exclusive is really pushing it.

CMA document data
"ABK is a game developer and publisher founded in 2008 and headquartered in
Santa Monica, California, US.16 ABK is publicly listed on Nasdaq. ABK’s global
turnover in the financial year 2021 was over £6 billion, of which approximately
£716 million was generated in the UK."

"Microsoft is a global technology company founded in 1975 and headquartered in Redmond, Washington, US.1 Microsoft is publicly listed on Nasdaq. Microsoft’s global turnover in the financial year 2021 was close to £125 billion, of which [] was generated in the UK."

If you assume that users value for that redacted number is correct at $5B you are talking almost a loss in revenue on a $70B expenditure.

If they dont put the game on PS, that is a big loss for them.
As for the $70b expenditure, they have it as a property value.

Activision would be a free money to them, compared to that money being left to rot in the bank.

 

[feynoob]

CMA literally pointed out why Cloud gaming will be a big issue for behavioral access remedies to work.

Nvidia deal should fix that.

 

[POKEYCLYDE]

If MS next is Take2(really cheap for them) then I think ps will be in trouble.

With what a hassle CoD has been, GTA would be even worse. Chilean Call of Duty gamers put more importance on GTA than CoD when surveyed.

 

[solidus12]

So they acquire Activision/Blizzard and still can’t “compete” would they try acquire EA or Ubisoft next? What’s stopping them from buying the whole industry at this point?

 

[Three]

If they dont put the game on PS, that is a big loss for them.

Not sure what you mean here. Not selling MS services/products in the UK market would be a bigger loss than not selling the game on PS.

As for the $70b expenditure, they have it as a property value.

Activision would be a free money to them, compared to that money being left to rot in the bank.

If you have money in the bank would you just buy a house that in order to rent out you would have to take a similar paycut for in your salary? That's not free money, why would you rationally do that?

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Can you explain to me why you think this deal is good for you as a gamer or the industry at large?

Wouldn’t it be better for a hugely successful company to stay wholly independent while some of that cash Microsoft had be deployed towards growing existing studios and forming new ones so that the industry gets more games to play overall?

As a primarily Xbox gamer (though I own all the consoles), for me the deal is beneficial just because of GamePass, and also the removal of any chance Sony has to make the game a timed exclusive or chop it up for exclusive content.

Take Zenimax for example. Now I can play Starfield day one on my Xbox instead of waiting a year, and play it on GamePass, and not have to worry about any content being PS exclusive. Same for ABK titles.

Also you just assume that it MS doesn’t buy ABK, no one else will. These studios MS is buying, they are/were all looking to be bought. Isn’t this a common defense from warriors here with regards to Sonys many moneyhat deals, “well the publishers have to agree!! takes two to tango!!” Why does that not apply here?

The main crux of anti-acquisition arguments is that it’s PS gamers who basically want things to stay the same and want to watch MS have to spend tons of money (just not on acquisitions LuLz) to try and compete. Meanwhile they continue to get loads of timed exclusives or exclusive content in their games.

Tough titties.

 

[feynoob]

Not sure what you mean here. Not selling MS services/products in the UK market would be a bigger loss than not selling the game on PS.

I was not talking about MS leaving UK, but more about overall activision product revenue.

If you have money in the bank would you just buy a house that in order to rent out you would have to take a similar paycut for in your salary? That's not free money, why would you rationally do that?

That money gives you asset. You can sell your house to get that money back, after you have earning enough money from the rent.

 

[Three]

I was not talking about MS leaving UK, but more about overall activision product revenue.

There's your problem then because these numbers were being discussed to evaluate the feasibility of MS leaving the UK in order to get this deal done.

 

[feynoob]

There's your problem then because these numbers were being discussed to evaluate the feasibility of MS leaving the UK in order to get this deal done.

MS will lose their stock and their trillion value if they leave UK.
70b is small, compared to the catastrophe of leaving UK.

 

[Mr Reasonable]

I used gamepass for 12 months up to now.
Never payed more then 4€ for a Month.

6 times I paid 1 €
6 times I paid 3,99€

I just don't let that subscription running if its getting pricier.
I just use it to try some games that are on gamepass and I i like/want them I buy them on steam then.

There's no way that the forum nerd method of cheap Gamepass is being used by the masses.

It doesn't matter if it's possible or not, generally speaking people just don't dedicate themselves to scrimping and saving to play games cheaper. People don't buy subscriptions by the month, generally speaking. If they did, the business model for Disney/Apple Plus and Netflix just wouldn't work out.

The smart thing to do would be to sign up for one service for a month. Watch all the good stuff and then move to a different service and do the same and repeat.

But, people generally don't do that. And I think there's no reason to think that Gamepass is any different.

I think for most people $15 a month for Gamepass/Netflix just isn't that big a problem.

 

[laynelane]

Yet. It will be when Microsoft exits, just you wait and see.

They could rename it "Death Valley".

 

[Balducci30]

There's no way that the forum nerd method of cheap Gamepass is being used by the masses.

It doesn't matter if it's possible or not, generally speaking people just don't dedicate themselves to scrimping and saving to play games cheaper. People don't buy subscriptions by the month, generally speaking. If they did, the business model for Disney/Apple Plus and Netflix just wouldn't work out.

The smart thing to do would be to sign up for one service for a month. Watch all the good stuff and then move to a different service and do the same and repeat.

But, people generally don't do that. And I think there's no reason to think that Gamepass is any different.

I think for most people $15 a month for Gamepass/Netflix just isn't that big a problem.

Yeah I don’t know the loopholes I spend 15 a month - but I spend that on Netflix, hbomax, Hulu, appletv as well - I just cancel for the time periods there’s nothing I want to see/play

 

[Topher]

The main crux of anti-acquisition arguments is that it’s PS gamers who basically want things to stay the same and want to watch MS have to spend tons of money (just not on acquisitions LuLz) to try and compete. Meanwhile they continue to get loads of timed exclusives or exclusive content in their games.

Yes, I absolutely want Microsoft to spend tons of money making games rather than buy companies already making games. That means they are actually creating games rather than buying games that were going to be made regardless. Both Microsoft and Sony are going to continue to moneyhat timed exclusives so this deal doesn't cure those ills in the industry either way.

 

[Bonsaibäumchen]

There's no way that the forum nerd method of cheap Gamepass is being used by the masses.

It doesn't matter if it's possible or not, generally speaking people just don't dedicate themselves to scrimping and saving to play games cheaper. People don't buy subscriptions by the month, generally speaking. If they did, the business model for Disney/Apple Plus and Netflix just wouldn't work out.

The smart thing to do would be to sign up for one service for a month. Watch all the good stuff and then move to a different service and do the same and repeat.

But, people generally don't do that. And I think there's no reason to think that Gamepass is any different.

I think for most people $15 a month for Gamepass/Netflix just isn't that big a problem.

I have lots of friend and me included who do that for Movie streaming but non of them do that for gamepass.
Dunno what else to tell you.
Yes obviously theres also other people who are going to use it as you said, I don't deny that.
And it wasn't my intention to paint a picture that no one does that or only a minority.

 

[IFireflyl]

I think people read that statement one way when it can be read multiple ways, especially when you take into account that they were talking about full and/or partial foreclosure.

Foreclosure of Zenimax games does mean exclusivity for Starfield, Redfall and Elder Scrolls, but it also means stop selling and supporting all Zenimax games on rival storefronts (Skyrim, Doom 2016/Eternal, Wolfenstein, Deathloop, GWT, ESO, FO76, etc.)

It's weasel wording and lawyer speak to say "We have no incentive to cease making Zenimax games available on other consoles." Because it can be read as "We will release games on other consoles moving forward." But it can also mean, and in Microsoft's view, probably does mean: "It doesn't make business sense to take Skyrim, ESO and FO76 off of rival consoles."

This is the most productive argument I have seen, and I appreciate your input. Major corporations are, like politicians, well versed in the art of double-speak and (as you so eloquently stated) "weasel wording". It is pretty clear that Microsoft was intentionally being deceitful though, so the original point that they misled the regulators is 100% correct, even if the misleading assertions wouldn't have impacted the deal in the first place. Depending on how you interpret the message they either misled (with double-speak and "weasel wording"), or they flat out lied. Either way, for someone to claim that Microsoft was been a saint through these last couple of acquisitions is grossly incorrect.

And for clarity, I don't think that Nintendo or Sony would do any better if they were in Microsoft's position. This is how mega-corporations operate, and they will all be as shady and deceptive as they can (within the constraints of the law) in order to get ahead.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Yes, I absolutely want Microsoft to spend tons of money making games rather than buy companies already making games. That means they are actually creating games rather than buying games that were going to be made regardless. Both Microsoft and Sony are going to continue to moneyhat timed exclusives so this deal doesn't cure those ills in the industry either way.

Oh for sure. They should go to the Developer Store where they have endless supplies of talented developers and then stop by IP Mart where the shelves are full of quality new IP’s and then finally stop by RealEstateCo where they can buy already up and running infrastructure so these devs can get to work.

Or they can just buy all of that from already existing studios who are actively looking to be bought and then just welcome them into the MS family and culture and start supporting whatever they want to make. You know, the exact same way Sony got almost all of their existing studios, and the same way Sony has been buying studios lately instead of building them from the ground up.

It’s business. The quicker most of you get over it, the better off you’ll be and the less it will sting.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

You know, the exact same way Sony got almost all of their existing studios, and the same way Sony has been buying studios lately instead of building them from the ground up.

not quite

 

[intheinbetween]

So the narrative is now about MS quitting their whole business in the UK? Lol, some of you just want to see the world burn.

The UK beg to differ for those that think that would be a possibility

 

[Topher]

Oh for sure. They should go to the Developer Store where they have endless supplies of talented developers and then stop by IP Mart where the shelves are full of quality new IP’s and then finally stop by RealEstateCo where they can buy already up and running infrastructure so these devs can get to work.

Or they can just buy all of that from already existing studios who are actively looking to be bought and then just welcome them into the MS family and culture and start supporting whatever they want to make. You know, the exact same way Sony got almost all of their existing studios, and the same way Sony has been buying studios lately instead of building them from the ground up.

It’s business. The quicker most of you get over it, the better off you’ll be and the less it will sting.

This is the result when someone cares more about a game company as a "business" than the actual games they make. You can save your "get over it" nonsense. I'm not going to be out any games because of this. Gamers are not benefiting from lateral shifts like these. Not that it matters, right? Microsoft gets the win. yay

 

[feynoob]

GHG
Can you believe that?
That was the comeback of the season.

 

[poppabk]

Oh for sure. They should go to the Developer Store where they have endless supplies of talented developers and then stop by IP Mart where the shelves are full of quality new IP’s and then finally stop by RealEstateCo where they can buy already up and running infrastructure so these devs can get to work.

Or they can just buy all of that from already existing studios who are actively looking to be bought and then just welcome them into the MS family and culture and start supporting whatever they want to make. You know, the exact same way Sony got almost all of their existing studios, and the same way Sony has been buying studios lately instead of building them from the ground up.

It’s business. The quicker most of you get over it, the better off you’ll be and the less it will sting.

It might have been viable a decade ago, but with games from established studios taking 5 years, building from the ground up just isn't feasible anymore,

 

[Iced Arcade]

GHG
Can you believe that?
That was the comeback of the season.

deal approval watch season 2?



not sure if you know but you can PM someone lol

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

So the narrative is now about MS quitting their whole business in the UK? Lol, some of you just want to see the world burn.

The UK beg to differ for those that think that would be a possibility

is not narrative. is wishful thinking/wet dreams

 

[MasterCornholio]

So the narrative is now about MS quitting their whole business in the UK? Lol, some of you just want to see the world burn.

The UK beg to differ for those that think that would be a possibility

I think it started with the talk about Microsoft threatening the CMA. Which I don't believe is true BTW.

 

[reksveks]

GHG
Can you believe that?
That was the comeback of the season.

We are making it too hard for ourselves. I do like Reiss Nelson, and hope he gets some more minutes but it may be a struggle to fit him in.

 

[Heisenberg007]

It might have been viable a decade ago, but with games from established studios taking 5 years, building from the ground up just isn't feasible anymore,

that's the only way to get new games. And if a publisher has the talent, they can build new teams whenever they want to do it.

Sony literally has been doing it for years, which leads to new games for PlayStation gamers. Buying ABK or Zenimax didn't bring any new games to Xbox that they wouldn't have got otherwise. Acquiring established teams literally get Xbox gamers the same games, despite MS spending billions of dollars.

 

[ManaByte]

Oh for sure. They should go to the Developer Store where they have endless supplies of talented developers and then stop by IP Mart where the shelves are full of quality new IP’s and then finally stop by RealEstateCo where they can buy already up and running infrastructure so these devs can get to work.

Or they can just buy all of that from already existing studios who are actively looking to be bought and then just welcome them into the MS family and culture and start supporting whatever they want to make. You know, the exact same way Sony got almost all of their existing studios, and the same way Sony has been buying studios lately instead of building them from the ground up.

It’s business. The quicker most of you get over it, the better off you’ll be and the less it will sting.

 

[Three]

The document doesn't say there is no incentive for exclusives. In fact it even lays out what that incentive would be. It eludes to them being unlikely to go that way with with some titles (never makes a declaration for all though) and that their forecast at the time did not demonstrate financial incentive. Unlikely is not equivalent to never happening in a legal document. Again, there are no declarations in that document that Zenimax games would or would not be exclusive.

Can you point out which titles that's unlikely for? Hi-fi rush, redfall, starfield, elder scrolls 6. From the smallest games to the biggest. Can you name a known Zenimax game that it's implausible for since every one we know of shows it's possible. They have even demonstrated that for GaaS games it isn't required. I believe Redfall is a GaaS game there too and they have other GaaS games from other purchased studios made exclusive.

Nobody is saying there are declarations that games wouldn't be exclusive, there are assurances that MS has no incentive to make them exclusive, but MS had the right to after the acquisition because it was determined by the regulators that there were no input foreclosure risks for future or past games even if it were to.

"why would I even do that, doesn't make sense"
"It's OK, I wouldn’t even care if you did"
"ok that's what I'm doing"

Is the layman order of events. The first is misleading but it isn't a declaration that you won't do something.

 

[feynoob]

We are making it too hard for ourselves. I do like Reiss Nelson, and hope he gets some more minutes but it may be a struggle to fit him in.

Injured derailed his success. Hope he gets his form back.
Right now we need a striker with trossard and nketiah injury.
He needs to be a sub and Impactful like today.

As for his future, I wish him the best luck like welbeck.

 

[feynoob]

deal approval watch season 2?



not sure if you know but you can PM someone lol

You don't the emotion that I am feeling now.
My team did a century comeback from a losing position.

 

[reksveks]

If you have money in the bank would you just buy a house that in order to rent out you would have to take a similar paycut for in your salary? That's not free money, why would you rationally do that?

Why do you have to take a pay cut in your salary?

I lost track of this analogy.

If you can buy to rent and the return is greater than the annual interest rate and you believe that the value of the property won't depreciate than you generally do that.

 

[Three]

Why do you have to take a pay cut in your salary?

I lost track of this analogy.

If you can buy to rent and the return is greater than the annual interest rate and you believe that the value of the property won't depreciate than you generally do that.

Cutting off UK business entirely to make the purchase is the paycut in the analogy.

 

[Iced Arcade]

You don't the emotion that I am feeling now.
My team did a century comeback from a losing position.

I'm just fucking with ya lol

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

It might have been viable a decade ago, but with games from established studios taking 5 years, building from the ground up just isn't feasible anymore,

I agree. At least not building up multiple studios simultaneously. Plus, MS has done that in addition to buying studios. Games take too long and MS has had more than their fair share of troubles even from their own built up studios.

 

[DaGwaphics]

Can you point out which titles that's unlikely for? Hi-fi rush, redfall, starfield, elder scrolls 6. From the smallest games to the biggest. Can you name a known Zenimax game that it's implausible for since every one we know of shows it's possible. They have even demonstrated that for GaaS games it isn't required. I believe Redfall is a GaaS game there too and they have other GaaS games from other purchased studios.

Nobody is saying there are declarations that games wouldn't be exclusive, there are assurances that MS has no incentive to make them exclusive, but MS had the right to after the acquisition because it was determined by the regulators that there were no input foreclosure risks for future or past games even if it were to.

"why would I even do that, doesn't make sense"
"It's OK, I wouldn’t even care if you did"
"ok that's what I'm doing"

Is the layman order of events. The first is misleading but it isn't a declaration that you won't do something.

The point is that saying "I have no incentive to do X" is not the same thing as saying "I will not do X". It's a very basic distinction.

Obviously, these regulatory boards are better at discerning vague legalese than Gafers.

I could say "I have no incentive to buy a PS5", I could totally still do it tomorrow though. There were no legal declarations that Zenimax games would remain multi-plat, either from MS or in requests by the regulators. MS never maid a promise they didn't keep there. They made some vague statements about their intent based on their current console sales forecast. They have made much clearer statements regarding CoD, but even there, words alone wouldn't be enough if the action was deemed a problem.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

This is the result when someone cares more about a game company as a "business" than the actual games they make. You can save your "get over it" nonsense. I'm not going to be out any games because of this. Gamers are not benefiting from lateral shifts like these. Not that it matters, right? Microsoft gets the win. yay

I already explained how I, a gamer, benefit from this. And of course I care about Xbox as a business, it’s more than games. It’s their hardware, their services, their vision. And most importantly, their games.

But hey, have fun living under a rock where studios are going to be built from the ground up and all of these studios wanting to be bought are forced to close down and funnel out into other jobs.

 

[wolffy71]

There's your problem then because these numbers were being discussed to evaluate the feasibility of MS leaving the UK in order to get this deal done.

I think the issue isn't how much money they would lose.

It's more would the UK being willing to actually enforce a ban on MS products. It would cost their country a lot of money.

It's big enough that an impact on the economy would be felt. Would elected officials make that call? Over a video game?

Maybe they would idk but MS may be willing to roll the dice, betting they wont.

 

[Dutchy]

As a primarily Xbox user (Though I own all the consoles). This deal would be the biggest blow to quality in the industry that we've seen since the fucking Kinect 2.0

As a primarily Xbox user (Though I own all the consoles). I wouldn't want to see Xbox and MS run even more of my favorite IP's into the ground, delay even more of my highly anticipated games, or lay off even more of my favorite developpers.

As a primarily Xbox user (Though I own all the consoles). I would rather see a certain brand actually do something vaguely good for once before deciding on trying to monopolize a big part of the industry.

As a primarily Xbox user (Though I own all the consoles), I can safely say that the majority of games that Sony releases are either certified worldwide bangers or instant cultural phenomena. And Xbox deserves squat if they can't even put out one banger with all that money they have.

Now, I'm going to play some Halo 3 (MCC to be precise, a very shoddy port. 360 servers have been closed down too unfortunately).

Everyone in favor of this deal going through is simply trying to justify a questionably bad purchase or is very sour about not being able to afford more than one plastic box per generation. I can't believe you guys are trying to rationalize this. Don't be so fucking insecure. Xbox has been dropping the balls for a long time now.

 

[Topher]

I already explained how I, a gamer, benefit from this. And of course I care about Xbox as a business, it’s more than games. It’s their hardware, their services, their vision. And most importantly, their games.

But hey, have fun living under a rock where studios are going to be built from the ground up and all of these studios wanting to be bought are forced to close down and funnel out into other jobs.

Right.....because The Initiative doesn't exist in your world.

 

[reksveks]

Cutting off UK business entirely to make the purchase is the paycut in the analogy.

its a cost and it still might work out, the maths would be back of the notepad stuff but i very much doubt it really works out,

Quick maths; correct my numbers and calculations.
- 5 billion lost revenue from all of MS in UK + 0.8bn lost revenue from ABK in the UK (lets say 6b); was it 5bn MS total revenue in the UK?
- ABK makes ~8 billion globally so in terns of net revenue they (MS) maybe slightly up $2 billion annually off a 70billion purchase (~9billion one-off win fall) so roughly ~3% ROI (minus the lost in value of the asset over the length that MS has ABK as an asset) on the purchase
- the question is whether you are going to be able to find much better opportunities than 3%? IMO yes.

I think the bigger issue would the fall-out with the CMA and other regulators.

 

[Heisenberg007]

I already explained how I, a gamer, benefit from this. And of course I care about Xbox as a business, it’s more than games. It’s their hardware, their services, their vision. And most importantly, their games.

But hey, have fun living under a rock where studios are going to be built from the ground up and all of these studios wanting to be bought are forced to close down and funnel out into other jobs.

Ah, yes. I forgot that if Activision isn't bought by Microsoft, it will be shut down because of how much they struggle financially.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Right.....because The Initiative doesn't exist in your world.

I was talking about them in this post:

I agree. At least not building up multiple studios simultaneously. Plus, MS has done that in addition to buying studios. Games take too long and MS has had more than their fair share of troubles even from their own built up studios.

And what exactly does MS have to show for The Initiative so far? They might as well not exist. Games take forever to make, acquisition is the way this will be done in the future. Again, it’s how Sony built their studios that make their games today for the most part, and it’s how they’ve been operating lately. The only difference is MS buys Ferraris and Sony buys electric scooters.

 

[Bumblebeetuna]

Ah, yes. I forgot that if Activision isn't bought by Microsoft, it will be shut down because of how much they struggle financially.

Ah, yes. I forgot that ABK is the only acquisition they have made. I also forgot that if MS didn’t buy ABK, who were actively looking for acquisition, ABK would have just went on as normal and not went to someone else to be bought.

Again, when Sony spends money, “it takes two to tango!!! blame the publisher, not Sony!!”

When those publishers come to MS wanting to be bought: