• 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.

geary

Member
This isn't about Game Pass. This is about CoD and Sony not wanting limited or no access to the franchise. You can spin that to Game Pass if you want to try but if you think it is only about keeping CoD off of Game Pass you have a lot of reading to do to get caught up on Sony's arguments against the acquisition.
This is is. They are scared that they will lose the Marketing deals and people will shift towards GP, even if they will still by a PS5. Players going to GP for CoD means losing all that money from MTX, which is huge loss for them. Believing or not, CoD MTX money is funding some of the PS5 exclusives....
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
This is is. They are scared that they will lose the Marketing deals and people will shift towards GP, even if they will still by a PS5. Players going to GP for CoD means losing all that money from MTX, which is huge loss for them. Believing or not, CoD MTX money is funding some of the PS5 exclusives....
Further explains the hostile move to purchase ABK. Weakening the competition. Making them smaller. Company of projection.
 

ironmang

Member
Its amusing fans celebrating more "exclusive" games from Bethesda and now ABK that they would already have the chance to play anyway (maybe not on gamepass day one but is beside the point) ... people are really really easy to persuade when the bias is this strong ... is literally happiness because the other lost and you won virtually nothing ... so sad that this is what you got to feel happy about

MS is not creating new and exciting exclusives .. is buying out the ones already existed ... and not beeing able to see this is fanboyism to its finest
This is why most pro-GP people are happy with these big acquisitions. They like how affordable and cheap gaming has become for them. Not because of list wars.
 

Topher

Gold Member
it seems this dude call out Jez for his subpar/misleading "journalism" and having financial motivation for the deal to be appoved.

and jezz got butthurt 😊 trying to "debunk" this dude
OK. I was confused with what your screenshot meant. I only saw a clip of that.

Jez tried to play the #cancelculture card by pulling up something from the past regarding some allegations of sexual assault or something. Sounds like the guy hit a nerve.
 
Its amusing fans celebrating more "exclusive" games from Bethesda and now ABK that they would already have the chance to play anyway (maybe not on gamepass day one but is beside the point) ... people are really really easy to persuade when the bias is this strong ... is literally happiness because the other lost and you won virtually nothing ... so sad that this is what you got to feel happy about

MS is not creating new and exciting exclusives .. is buying out the ones already existed ... and not beeing able to see this is fanboyism to its finest

Literally everything can be explained away and made fun of when you conveniently eliminate the #1 reason people are excited about it. Day one on GamePass is the #1 reason people were pumped for the Bethesda acquisition and the same applies to ABK but you brush it aside as “beside the point”. Nah, it actually is the point.

Also, in terms of “creating new and exciting exclusives”, well first off MS has no exclusives, they’re all on PC and/or other consoles. Secondly, yes they have?

1. Obsidian has said a tiny team was working on Grounded but work was slow because they didn’t have money. MS acquisition allowed the team to grow and work on it entirely while also allowing Obsidian to work on other projects.

2. Josh Sawyer has said multiple times that the acquisition and GamePass made Pentiment possible.

3. Ninja Theory had already passed on Bleeding Edge once, and couldn’t afford to have people making more than one game at a time. So the MS acquisition allowed them to work fully on Bleeding Edge while also making Hellblade II and other projects.

So that’s three examples off the top of my head, and there’s probably more. But even ignoring those games, you also have the acquisition and influx of Bill Gates money allowing devs to make their games better. We saw Double Fine saying the acquisition allowed them to have more people working on the game and making more content, and inXile said the acquisition allowed them to add more content to Wasteland 3 and have the game fully voiced over.

So you have:

Day one GamePass games
Games coming sooner than they otherwise would have
More projects for these developers
Better games thanks to financial support
Lack of games being timed exclusive on Playstation
Lack of games being chopped up and content being PlayStation exclusive


Gee golly you’re right, what kind of fanboy would want that.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Not legal as in they would go to jail necessarily like for insider trading, but they would be subject to lawsuits aplenty for negligence. You could probably face jail time if you deliberately tanked a company causing massive losses but that would be unlikely and hard to prove.

I believe Arioco Arioco is an attorney (I think). Care to share your expertise here?
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
I've already explained this, but I've seen 7 full seasons of Suits. So you know...

I'm sorry, bro. Did not realize your expertise in this matter.


Sorry Joey Tribbiani GIF
 

skit_data

Member
I’m really don’t know how this will end but if any regulator/regulators indeed does blocks the deal, I fear this shit will go on for even longer. It feels like the whole subject has reached peak zenith right now but I fear it can get even worse.
 
This post has to be satire, right?

Spider-Man sold 33 million copies and is one of the most popular ips in the world, but sure, they're going to delay it because mighty Todd is coming out with Starfield that week. A game you can rent for 30 days for $1.

Not even a dollar if you do a few bing searches everyday for Microsoft rewards points. You can play starfield for free.
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
This is why most pro-GP people are happy with these big acquisitions. They like how affordable and cheap gaming has become for them. Not because of list wars.
MS does not need to acquire ABK to put COD on GP. Why are the pro-GP people cheering for this acquisition?

They can offer a load of cash to ABK, get the marketing deal, and sign a GP contract.

In fact, for only around $10 billion (out of these $70 billion), MS can bring nearly every single third-party game out there on GP. Shouldn’t the pro-GP people like you hope that the acquisition fails and MS get the GP deals for almost ALL games out there?
 

Bojanglez

The Amiga Brotherhood
It always weirds me out to see people actually trash a good price like its a point of shame. Only seen it this gen.
To be fair I've seen it in other sectors, some people trash talk local drug dealers that give their product out at cut rate prices to clear out competition. They fail to see the great service these people are getting.
 

Arioco

Member
I believe Arioco Arioco is an attorney (I think). Care to share your expertise here?


Sorry, I'm not paying too much attention to this thread, so just to make sure... Your question is whether Jim Ryan would be in trouble should he not try to stop this acquisition, right? Did I understand correctly?

First of all I must say I'm not a criminal lawyer, I tried for a very brief period of time and I can't say I enjoyed the experience, so maybe there're people on this very thread with a more expert opinion than mine. In any case the first question would be: which country are we talking about? USA? The problem with law is that not only can it be different from one country to another, it can even be the exact opposite. That's why I'm not licensed to practice in USA, how could I? xD

But anyway the way I see the question from my "non-American point of view" is this:

- Could Jim Ryan face criminal charges for not trying to stop a competitor from making an acquisition? Nope, not in a million years. No way. The idea is just ridiculous.

- Could Jim Ryan face a civil claim from SONY if he doesn't try his best to stop MS from buying Activision? My answer is still NO. Things get a little bit more interesting here, granted, but still... That's exactly the kind of things I do and I can't even imagine how I would do it unless this very situation and what Mr. Ryan is expected to do about it are laid down in the contract, which is highly unlikely. Based on what exactly? If SONY isn't happy with the way an employee is handling a situation what the company can and should do is fire him and hire someone else, maybe with specific instructions this time. Beyond that... there's not much to do since there would be nothing to base the claim on and it would only be a waste of money and resources. In any case what a third company decides tu purchase is not Ryan's responsability.
 

IFireflyl

Gold Member
Sorry, I'm not paying too much attention to this thread, so just to make sure... Your question is whether Jim Ryan would be in trouble should he not try to stop this acquisition, right? Did I understand correctly?

First of all I must say I'm not a criminal lawyer, I tried for a very brief period of time and I can't say I enjoyed the experience, so maybe there're people on this very thread with a more expert opinion than mine. In any case the first question would be: which country are we talking about? USA? The problem with law is that not only can it be different from one country to another, it can even be the exact opposite. That's why I'm not licensed to practice in USA, how could I? xD

But anyway the way I see the question from my "non-American point of view" is this:

- Could Jim Ryan face criminal charges for not trying to stop a competitor from making an acquisition? Nope, not in a million years. No way. The idea is just ridiculous.

- Could Jim Ryan face a civil claim from SONY if he doesn't try his best to stop MS from buying Activision? My answer is still NO. Things get a little bit more interesting here, granted, but still... That's exactly the kind of things I do and I can't even imagine how I would do it unless this very situation and what Mr. Ryan is expected to do about it are laid down in the contract, which is highly unlikely. Based on what exactly? If SONY isn't happy with the way an employee is handling a situation what the company can and should do is fire him and hire someone else, maybe with specific instructions this time. Beyond that... there's not much to do since there would be nothing to base the claim on and it would only be a waste of money and resources. In any case what a third company decides tu purchase is not Ryan's responsability.

I think they specifically were looking into insights into this general question:

"You could probably face jail time if you deliberately tanked a company causing massive losses but that would be unlikely and hard to prove."

I don't believe that they are asking a Activision/Microsoft/Sony-related question. Is that general question a possibility?
 

gothmog

Gold Member
It always weirds me out to see people actually trash a good price like its a point of shame. Only seen it this gen.
Agreed. Like I understand the worry about funding big games, but there's a ton of wiggle room as far as titles that fit into a service like that.
 

ironmang

Member
MS does not need to acquire ABK to put COD on GP. Why are the pro-GP people cheering for this acquisition?

They can offer a load of cash to ABK, get the marketing deal, and sign a GP contract.

In fact, for only around $10 billion (out of these $70 billion), MS can bring nearly every single third-party game out there on GP. Shouldn’t the pro-GP people like you hope that the acquisition fails and MS get the GP deals for almost ALL games out there?
So you believe as long as the acquisition fails then almost every third party game will be day 1 on GP? That's an interesting theory you have there.
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
So you believe as long as the acquisition fails then almost every third party game will be day 1 on GP? That's an interesting theory you have there.
No. I'm saying that instead of spending $70 billion to acquire ABK and going through this nerve-racking legal process only to get ABK games on Game Pass, Microsoft could spend less than half of its amount and get Game Pass deals from nearly every publisher.

That means Game Pass deals for the latest Call of Duty, Diablo 4, next Assassin's Creeds, Dead Island 2, Street Fighter 6, Wild Hearts, Dead Space, and future 2024/2025 titles as well, e.g., The Witcher 4, Techland's next game, James Bond, Greedfall 2, etc.. $10-$20 billion will cover the next 2-3 years for Game Pass.

If Game Pass is the big reason for supporting this acquisition, shouldn't that be preferred over this acquisition by pro-GP people?
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
MS does not need to acquire ABK to put COD on GP. Why are the pro-GP people cheering for this acquisition?

They can offer a load of cash to ABK, get the marketing deal, and sign a GP contract.

In fact, for only around $10 billion (out of these $70 billion), MS can bring nearly every single third-party game out there on GP. Shouldn’t the pro-GP people like you hope that the acquisition fails and MS get the GP deals for almost ALL games out there?
Too bad. MS prefers buying Activision. Just like Sony could do marketing deals with Bungie, but they bought them too. Maybe MS is sick of Sony doing endless exclusivity deals and just said what the hey, we'll just buy people out.

In business, they will always teach you to never rock the boat with a competitor with more money. Because they can always outspend you. Well, Sony seemed to get overly anxious hoarding up Activision deals the past 10 years (they even did a big Diablo 3 deal where the Xbox game wasnt even allowed to be mentioned or promoted by Activision until 1 month before launch). Hey, MS wants to turn the tides and control the marketing.

Just like all the Sony fans when pinned with controversial business strategies, well I can say the same..... "it's a business decision". See? Pretty dumb response back huh?

I'd like to see how you got "spending $10B to secure nearly every third party game on GP" was calculated. lol
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
No. I'm saying that instead of spending $70 billion to acquire ABK and going through this nerve-racking legal process only to get ABK games on Game Pass, Microsoft could spend less than half of its amount and get Game Pass deals from nearly every publisher.

What makes you think getting those games on game pass is the only reason MS is going for the acquisition ?
 

poppabk

Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
No. I'm saying that instead of spending $70 billion to acquire ABK and going through this nerve-racking legal process only to get ABK games on Game Pass, Microsoft could spend less than half of its amount and get Game Pass deals from nearly every publisher.

That means Game Pass deals for the latest Call of Duty, Diablo 4, next Assassin's Creeds, Dead Island 2, Street Fighter 6, Wild Hearts, Dead Space, and future 2024/2025 titles as well, e.g., The Witcher 4, Techland's next game, James Bond, Greedfall 2, etc.. $10-$20 billion will cover the next 2-3 years for Game Pass.

If Game Pass is the big reason for supporting this acquisition, shouldn't that be preferred over this acquisition by pro-GP people?
a) MS aren't ever going to spend that much on just gamepass deals because there would not be a return on investment
b) what happens in year 4?
 

Clintizzle

Lord of Edge.
Was there ever evidence of Sony setting terms with publishers asking not to put their games on Gamepass or what that all bullshit?
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
Was there ever evidence of Sony setting terms with publishers asking not to put their games on Gamepass or what that all bullshit?
There is no evidence of Sony paying money to developers to not put their games on Game Pass.

There is evidence of Sony adding a clause to their marketing agreement that games that Sony is spending to market cannot join any subscription service for 1 year.

Everybody made a big deal out of it, but it makes total sense. And I bet Xbox would also have the same agreement (it'd be stupid not to have it). Because Sony spends money marketing a game because they hope to recover that money and then some by selling their game on PlayStation and getting that 30% revenue cut.

If the game launches on Game Pass, all of Sony's marketing campaigns would benefit Xbox and Game Pass. Gamers will learn about the game from PlayStation marketing and ads, and play the game day one on Game Pass. Sony's marketing deals will end up with a negative ROI. That'd be just poor business.
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
What makes you think getting those games on game pass is the only reason MS is going for the acquisition ?
I don't.

Ironmang was saying that pro-GP people support these acquisitions because of Game Pass and affordability.

This is why most pro-GP people are happy with these big acquisitions. They like how affordable and cheap gaming has become for them. Not because of list wars.

So my question was if Game Pass is the big reason, shouldn't they be happier if, instead of this deal, Microsoft uses this money to get Game Pass deals for dozens of other games, including ABK's.
 
No. I'm saying that instead of spending $70 billion to acquire ABK and going through this nerve-racking legal process only to get ABK games on Game Pass, Microsoft could spend less than half of its amount and get Game Pass deals from nearly every publisher.

That means Game Pass deals for the latest Call of Duty, Diablo 4, next Assassin's Creeds, Dead Island 2, Street Fighter 6, Wild Hearts, Dead Space, and future 2024/2025 titles as well, e.g., The Witcher 4, Techland's next game, James Bond, Greedfall 2, etc.. $10-$20 billion will cover the next 2-3 years for Game Pass.

If Game Pass is the big reason for supporting this acquisition, shouldn't that be preferred over this acquisition by pro-GP people?

hd remake GIF


Might as well say pro-GP people should want the deal to fail so MS can spend trillions buying the whole market!!! Yes!!!!

Yikes, bro. That’s the worst take you’ve had in this thread so far and that’s really saying something.

No, pro-GP people shouldn’t want MS wasting billions on timed exclusive content or day one GP deals if there are better deals out there to make. Clearly ABK is a better deal based on the fuss Sony is making.
 
Was there ever evidence of Sony setting terms with publishers asking not to put their games on Gamepass or what that all bullshit?

Even if it wasn't in the contracts they wouldn't be on gamepass anyway. It's pretty self evident that the big publishers ain't interested in launching games on a subscription service. Where are all these big 3rd party games then? Sony are blocking all of them are they? If they want gamepass so much they are more than free to cut a deal with Microsoft if they want to. That's the part people conveniently forget.
 
Last edited:

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
a) MS aren't ever going to spend that much on just gamepass deals because there would not be a return on investment
b) what happens in year 4?
I understand that, but that wasn't the topic of conversation. The discussion was that pro-GP people support these big acquisitions because they get more games on Game Pass at a cheaper price. So my question was, regardless of Microsoft's ROI, wouldn't pro-GP people prefer if, instead of acquiring ABK, Microsoft uses this money to get hundreds of games to Game Pass?
 
Last edited:

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
There is no evidence of Sony paying money to developers to not put their games on Game Pass.

There is evidence of Sony adding a clause to their marketing agreement that games that Sony is spending to market cannot join any subscription service for 1 year.

Everybody made a big deal out of it, but it makes total sense. And I bet Xbox would also have the same agreement (it'd be stupid not to have it). Because Sony spends money marketing a game because they hope to recover that money and then some by selling their game on PlayStation and getting that 30% revenue cut.

If the game launches on Game Pass, all of Sony's marketing campaigns would benefit Xbox and Game Pass. Gamers will learn about the game from PlayStation marketing and ads, and play the game day one on Game Pass. Sony's marketing deals will end up with a negative ROI. That'd be just poor business.
Why do you care so much if COD comes to GP? You arent even an Xbox gamer and COD will still be available to buy on PS systems. And for years at minimum as Sony already has another one of their muti-year Activision deals in place until 2025 or 2026.

Are you jealous or sore Xbox gamers play on GP and you got to pay $70? Well, too bad. Thats what competition brings. There's always one company who is cheaper.

Just treat it like MLB the Show. Sony charges you $70 on PS. But it's $70 or GP for Xbox. I doubt you care a Sony first party baseball game is on GP for Xbox. So why care if COD is?
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I don't.

Ironmang was saying that pro-GP people support these acquisitions because of Game Pass and affordability.

Well, yes. I'm a pro GP person and having Activisions back and future catalog on GP will definitely be great for me and a lot of others like me, but I think we can safely say MS, as a business, are looking far beyond just that.
 

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
Why do you care so much if COD comes to GP? You arent even an Xbox gamer and COD will still be available to buy on PS systems. And for years at minimum as Sony already has another one of their muti-year Activision deals in place until 2025 or 2026.

Are you jealous or sore Xbox gamers play on GP and you got to pay $70? Well, too bad. Thats what competition brings. There's always one company who is cheaper.

Just treat it like MLB the Show. Sony charges you $70 on PS. But it's $70 or GP for Xbox.
lol, I don't give a flying duck if COD comes to Game Pass. More power to Game Pass users and Microsoft if they sign a Game Pass deal. Good for them.

You jumped into a conversation and are now changing the topic though. This was not the discussion.
 

Kilau

Member
hd remake GIF


Might as well say pro-GP people should want the deal to fail so MS can spend trillions buying the whole market!!! Yes!!!!

Yikes, bro. That’s the worst take you’ve had in this thread so far and that’s really saying something.

No, pro-GP people shouldn’t want MS wasting billions on timed exclusive content or day one GP deals if there are better deals out there to make. Clearly ABK is a better deal based on the fuss Sony is making.
Some of us pro-GP people couldn’t care less about ABK games and those games coming to the service is not a positive to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom