• 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?

  • Yes, will be approved without changes.

    Votes: 221 24.9%

  • Yes, will be approved but with structural changes to ABK.

    Votes: 102 11.5%

  • Yes, will be approved but only with behavioral concessions.

    Votes: 262 29.6%

  • No, will not be approved.

    Votes: 301 34.0%
  • Total voters
    886
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Walter Matthau

Walter Matthau

Gold Member
adamsapple said:
Here's why

duUMr3z.png
Click to expand...

What a waste of money. 238 million copies is apparently nothing compared to what Ryse 2 would have sold.

Someone really needs to point Phil to these forums so he can make better decisions.
 
John Wick

John Wick

Member
Ozriel said:
Let’s not shift goalposts. The entire premise of your previous comment was about ‘taking games away’. Sneaking in acquisition size is diversionary.
To repeat, you’ve made posts expressing hope that Sony makes all subsequent Souls, Street Fighter, Resident Evil and Final Fantasy games exclusive, yet insist Microsoft is evil for making the likes of Starfield exclusive. Isn’t that hypocritical?
You’d be hard pressed to bring out anything from my post history that confirms this statement.
Square’s upcoming Kingdom Hearts 4 and FF Crisis Core VII beg to differ
Click to expand...
Sony isn't the one who bought a 3rd party publisher and took games away from Xbox. MS started this by buying Bethesda and taking away multiple IP from PS why isn't it ok for Sony to buy either Square or Capcom?
 
JerryinSoCal

JerryinSoCal

Member
MatrixReloaded101 said:
No, It makes more sense to buy the publisher instead of doing one off deals considering Xbox's main goal. Xbox wants to grow game pass as much as they can and in order to grow any content subscriptions you need a consistent stream of content to get new subs and keep old subs. Buying the publisher guarantees them content now and in the future.

Sony has a bigger install base and mindshare so they can't compete with Sony when it comes to getting the one off deals because Sony has more leverage in those negations because they have a bigger install base. MS/Xbox is using their biggest strength which is their endless pocket book lol.

Now, COD is very important to Sony because that game alone makes sony more profit in 1 year than God of war, TLOUS and GT7 can combined because sony doesn't have to spend money to make COD but playstation is the biggest platform for COD so if they lose COD they would lose billions of profit. This is why they are fighting so hard to expand the rights to keep COD on PlayStation. Xbox claimed they will always keep it on Playstation publicly but Jim Ryan come out and said Phil told him it will be exclusive for at least 3 more years behind closed doors, hence the fall out that is now happening from that conversation.

At the end of the day, once Xbox buys activision they don't need to let sony keep COD because they will own the IP and can do whatever they want with it but I would think it would make more financial sense to keep it on Playstation so they can continue to generate that revenue from PlayStation and reinvest it back into the development of the new COD games.

I think Xbox is placing a lot of trust in Game pass and I don't see how AAA games can stay sustainable with the service but we will see how this all plays out.
Click to expand...
MS could easily pay to have games show up on game pass and save tens of billions of dollars, now they are not only paying for the publisher but will have thousands of new employees. MS was never an underdog here, they were the ones who started throwing money around the second they got into gaming. Paying for timed exclusivity and DLC was something that started with xbox.

I agree on the making sense from a business perspective to keep the games on PlayStation, that will help cover all of the new costs they will have, at the same time we know MS is already planning on taking the game away even after publicly denying that they were going to do that. It's always bad when a platform holder buys publishers IMO. I see people who are pro playstation saying "sony should buy____" and i just don't get it? As someone who owns a PS5 and Series X I don't see how anyone benefits from these kinds of buyouts. Xbox gamers would have had all of those bethesda games and all of these activision games even if they didn't buy the companies so they really see no benefit other than games being put out on game pass. Sony has yet to buy a publisher and make the games exclusive but if they did I'd be against that too. Both companies need to stop paying for 3rd party exclusives as well, it's anti consumer and they both do it.
 
Last edited:
John Wick

John Wick

Member
SmurfMustard said:
The people complaining now are the same people cheering the next organic acquisition or applauding the "smart business decision" of a money hat.

John Wick John Wick Really liked the movies, but correct me if I'm wrong, John was never that whiny in them. Why did you choose that nametag. Makes no sense.
Click to expand...
And SmurfMustard does?
Also this is the interwebs not the movies
 
SenjutsuSage

SenjutsuSage

Banned
adamsapple said:
But you're literally saying the same in your post, just with the brands reversed ... you should see why multiple users are calling out the hypocrisy.




Here's why

duUMr3z.png







To be fair, we don't know what platforms KH4 is coming on right now. There is a more than usual chance that Sony will pay Square a ton to keep it off of Xbox looking at other recent output like FFXVI, VII Remake, Valkyrie Elysium etc.
Click to expand...

Me personally, I'm very glad Playstation 5 has its perks and advantages over Xbox, just as I'm glad Xbox has its perks and advantages over Playstation. I'm always going to support both, so I at least want the two differentiating themselves. Activision Blizzard being acquired by Microsoft just adds an extra edge to the Xbox side, especially for what it will do for Game Pass and the internal development studios Microsoft will have. All those resources will benefit their ability to improve all their first party studios. They'll be able to borrow from and learn from each other, like what's already transpiring a lot between current Xbox first party studios.
 
phil_t98

phil_t98

#SonyToo
JerryinSoCal said:
MS could easily pay to have games show up on game pass and save tens of billions of dollars, now they are not only paying for the publisher but will have thousands of new employees. MS was never an underdog here, they were the ones who started throwing money around the second they got into gaming. Paying for timed exclusivity and DLC was something that started with xbox.

I agree on the making sense from a business perspective to keep the games on PlayStation, that will help cover all of the new costs they will have, at the same time we know MS is already planning on taking the game away even after publicly denying that they were going to do that. It's always bad when a platform holder buys publishers IMO. I see people who are pro playstation saying "sony should buy____" and i just don't get it? As someone who owns a PS5 and Series X I don't see how anyone benefits from these kinds of buyouts. Xbox gamers would have had all of those bethesda games and all of these activision games even if they didn't buy the companies so they really see no benefit other than games being put out on game pass. Sony has yet to buy a publisher and make the games exclusive but if they did I'd be against that too. Both companies need to stop paying for 3rd party exclusives as well, it's anti consumer and they both do it.
Click to expand...

do you not remember Sony throwing money around when they got into the console business? making sure games like Tomb raider 2 and tomb raider 3 were not on other consoles at the time? just one example of what they did
 
G

Godot25

Banned
John Wick said:
Sony isn't the one who bought a 3rd party publisher and took games away from Xbox. MS started this by buying Bethesda and taking away multiple IP from PS why isn't it ok for Sony to buy either Square or Capcom?
Click to expand...
Why will that not be okay? It's business after all. If Microsoft can buy Bethesda and Activision Blizzard, Sony can buy a publisher too. Question is if they can afford it or if it even make sense in case of Square since they are already basically first-party publisher :)
 
Last edited:
freefornow

freefornow

Gold Member
phil_t98 said:
and if that was the case why are they so concerned over COD?
Click to expand...
They potentialy lose their $ slice of:
20Call of Duty: Modern Warfare30,000,000Call of DutyMulti-platformOctober 25, 2019Infinity WardActivision
32Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 326,500,000Call of DutyMulti-platformNovember 8, 2011Infinity Ward / SledgehammerActivision
33Call of Duty: Black Ops26,200,000Call of DutyMulti-platformNovember 9, 2010TreyarchActivision
40Call of Duty: Black Ops II24,200,000Call of DutyMulti-platformNovember 12, 2012TreyarchActivision
49Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 222,700,000Call of DutyMulti-platformNovember 10, 2009Infinity WardActivision
No idea what the sales splits are, but posssibly PC No1 and PS No2?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games

Interesting that Xbox Game Studios has 2 games in the top 50 selling games of all time. No 1 & 41 (Kinect really was the schniz at the time)
 
pasterpl

pasterpl

Member
phil_t98 said:
playstation who have less money than Microsoft and is all probing up other parts of the Sony company?

and if that was the case why are they so concerned over COD?
Click to expand...

freefornow said:
They potentialy lose their $ slice of:
20Call of Duty: Modern Warfare30,000,000Call of DutyMulti-platformOctober 25, 2019Infinity WardActivision
32Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 326,500,000Call of DutyMulti-platformNovember 8, 2011Infinity Ward / SledgehammerActivision
33Call of Duty: Black Ops26,200,000Call of DutyMulti-platformNovember 9, 2010TreyarchActivision
40Call of Duty: Black Ops II24,200,000Call of DutyMulti-platformNovember 12, 2012TreyarchActivision
49Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 222,700,000Call of DutyMulti-platformNovember 10, 2009Infinity WardActivision
No idea what the sales splits are, but posssibly PC No1 and PS No2?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games

Interesting that Xbox Game Studios has 2 games in the top 50 selling games of all time. No 1 & 41 (Kinect really was the schniz at the time)
Click to expand...

It was estimated that Sony makes approx. $400 million in revenue on CoD yearly releases.
 
Mephisto40

Mephisto40

Member
IDKFA said:
Would there be a backlash? A lot of Xbox owners already have Gamepass. Making Elder Scrolls VI or a future COD would see subscription levels skyrocket.
Click to expand...
You honestly think forcing people to get a gamepass subscription to play a game wouldn't piss people off?

We live in a world where people still refuse to buy games digital, which is why these current consoles have disc drives, and you think people are going to be happy having their games forced behind a subscription paywall?

With all due respect, your idea won't work
 
IDKFA

IDKFA

I am Become Bilbo Baggins
Mephisto40 said:
You honestly think forcing people to get a gamepass subscription to play a game wouldn't piss people off?

We live in a world where people still refuse to buy games digital, which is why these current consoles have disc drives, and you think people are going to be happy having their games forced behind a subscription paywall?

With all due respect, your idea won't work
Click to expand...

TV streaming services have exclusive content that can only be watched on their service. Nobody complains about that. Why would this be any different?

Sure, some people who hold onto physical media or like digital "ownership" would be complain, but I think in a few years they'll be an extreme minority. I personally believe soon the only way to play games will be vis a subscription and streaming model, so making games exclusive to Gamepass is going to happen eventually.
 
Topher

Topher

Gold Member
IDKFA said:
TV streaming services have exclusive content that can only be watched on their service. Nobody complains about that. Why would this be any different?
Click to expand...

If you've already paid for the equipment to get into the ecosystem forcing a subscription on top of it isn't going to go over very well.
 
Last edited:
DenchDeckard

DenchDeckard

Moderated wildly
I listened to a podcast last week that put it almost perfectly.

"Sony are upset that anyone else is attempting to do what they have done for 20 years" or something along those lines.

The facts are Microsoft got absolutely ripped when they attempted to secure large third party game in tomb raider so they are going with a new approach of acquiring studios instead. Let's see how it goes for them.
 
Hendrick's

Hendrick's

If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
DaGwaphics said:
^ I think Hoeg missed the point there. I think MS was referencing the game distribution/software market, which is what MS is looking to acquire. Last I checked MS wasn't looking to purchase one of the other console manufacturers, thus I'm not sure how that distinction makes a bit of difference here.
Click to expand...
He is just another clickbait YouTuber, so no surprise here.
 
DaGwaphics

DaGwaphics

Member
Hendrick's said:
He is just another clickbait YouTuber, so no surprise here.
Click to expand...

He isn't a bad source to use just to get a handle on the basics of some of the different legal things that come along, but yeah, he's all about those clicks just like the rest of the YT creators.
 
jonnyp

jonnyp

Member
IDKFA said:
TV streaming services have exclusive content that can only be watched on their service. Nobody complains about that. Why would this be any different?

Sure, some people who hold onto physical media or like digital "ownership" would be complain, but I think in a few years they'll be an extreme minority. I personally believe soon the only way to play games will be vis a subscription and streaming model, so making games exclusive to Gamepass is going to happen eventually.
Click to expand...

Nobody complains about that? Really now.
 
jonnyp

jonnyp

Member
IDKFA said:
Who complains about it? It's a given that Netflix, Disney, Amazon etc will have exclusive shows on their service.
Click to expand...

Everyone ? You'd rather subscribe to umpteen services rather than one? My condolences then.
 
Last edited:
Clear

Clear

CliffyB's Cock Holster
freefornow said:
They potentialy lose their $ slice of:
20Call of Duty: Modern Warfare30,000,000Call of DutyMulti-platformOctober 25, 2019Infinity WardActivision
32Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 326,500,000Call of DutyMulti-platformNovember 8, 2011Infinity Ward / SledgehammerActivision
33Call of Duty: Black Ops26,200,000Call of DutyMulti-platformNovember 9, 2010TreyarchActivision
40Call of Duty: Black Ops II24,200,000Call of DutyMulti-platformNovember 12, 2012TreyarchActivision
49Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 222,700,000Call of DutyMulti-platformNovember 10, 2009Infinity WardActivision
No idea what the sales splits are, but posssibly PC No1 and PS No2?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games

Interesting that Xbox Game Studios has 2 games in the top 50 selling games of all time. No 1 & 41 (Kinect really was the schniz at the time)
Click to expand...

Kinect Adventures was a pack in, if that's in then where on the list is Astro's Playroom going to land assuming it continues to be pre-installed on every PS5 unit sold? LOL
 
PaintTinJr

PaintTinJr

Member
Goalus said:
Activision has been very close to Microsoft since the 1980s when they were releasing games for MS-DOS. This acquisition is just the natural culmination of a decades-long and successful partnership.
Click to expand...
I gather this is sarcasm because nobody in gaming was close to anybody at Microsoft in the days of Dos, or even at the point of Windows 3.1 for Workgroups, But just in case you are serious, there was no DirectX or APIs to help with anything gaming then, even launching games inside a Windows session would potentially throw a TSR error if the game tried to map itself into too much of the first 640KB of memory (IIRC) to the extent it would be evicting Windows and so Windows would block it.
 
Goalus

Goalus

Member
PaintTinJr said:
I gather this is sarcasm because nobody in gaming was close to anybody at Microsoft in the days of Dos, or even at the point of Windows 3.1 for Workgroups, But just in case you are serious, there was no DirectX or APIs to help with anything gaming then, even launching games inside a Windows session would potentially throw a TSR error if the game tried to map itself into too much of the first 640KB of memory (IIRC) to the extent it would be evicting Windows and so Windows would block it.
Click to expand...
Well, I remember that there was HIMEM.SYS, and EMS and XMS memory managers in order to solve the problems you are describing. Looking at the XMS specification,
http://www.phatcode.net/res/219/files/xms20.txt
it looks like Microsoft was on the forefront of improving the life of game developers like Activision.

Quote from the linked document:
The XMS API Functions are accessed via the XMS driver's Control Function. The address of the Control Function is determined via INT 2Fh.

So APIs for game developers did exist after all. It seems that XMS was a software interface to the system's main memory, like Direct3D became a software interface to graphics hardware ten years later.
 
Last edited:
S

sinnergy

Member
Goalus said:
Well, I remember that there was HIMEM.SYS, and EMS and XMS memory managers in order to solve the problems you are describing. Looking at the XMS specification,
http://www.phatcode.net/res/219/files/xms20.txt
it looks like Microsoft was on the forefront of improving the life of game developers like Activision.

Quote from the linked document:
The XMS API Functions are accessed via the XMS driver's Control Function. The address of the Control Function is determined via INT 2Fh.

So APIs for game developers did exist after all. It seems that XMS was a software interface to the system's main memory, like Direct3D became a software interface to graphics hardware ten years later.
Click to expand...
There where even systems for DOS.
 
PaintTinJr

PaintTinJr

Member
Goalus said:
Well, I remember that there was HIMEM.SYS, and EMS and XMS memory managers in order to solve the problems you are describing. Looking at the XMS specification,
http://www.phatcode.net/res/219/files/xms20.txt
it looks like Microsoft was on the forefront of improving the life of game developers like Activision.

Quote from the linked document:
The XMS API Functions are accessed via the XMS driver's Control Function. The address of the Control Function is determined via INT 2Fh.

So APIs for game developers did exist after all. It seems that XMS was a software interface to the system's main memory, like Direct3D became a software interface to graphics hardware ten years later.
Click to expand...
And none of those were configured for DOS out of the box, so every single game needed you to consider its needs and alter the autoexec.bat/config.sys files (going by foggy memory) to enable extended memory and even get a CD-rom drive to work, and each game provide their own instructions for this very thing for any version of dos, Microsoft's or others, such a Digital Research Dos.

Some of us actually lived this first hand, and there was 0 consideration in Microsoft's products prior to 95 for these issues just working as-is for the consumer.
 
S

SDMG

Member
pasterpl said:
0 chance this will not go to 2nd phase
Click to expand...
I would consider this Phase 2 Microsoft & the EU Commission have been collaborating in preliminary works and gathering detailed information. If I'm not mistaken this has been going on for as long as every other jurisdiction. So the EU is in Phase 2 like the others. (Assuming)
 
FalsettoVibe

FalsettoVibe

Member
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Microsoft has Closed the Activision Blizzard King Deal
22 23 24 25 26
1K
77K
MasterCornholio replied
Microsoft now says the CMA was ‘tough and fair’ over Activision Blizzard deal
Opinion Business Game Dev
17
2K
DaGwaphics replied
FTC appeals to block already-completed Microsoft-Activision deal
2
63
5K
Mythoclast replied
  • Locked
UK minister defends CMA's decision to block MS/ABK
News
0
801
Daniel_Mallorca1985 replied
  • Locked
Microsoft to sell off Activision cloud gaming rights to Ubisoft in bid for UK approval
News Business 2 3 4
154
14K
Spyxos replied
Top Bottom