• 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.
Ar¢tos

Ar¢tos

Member
Goblinlinguitic said:
just trolling
Click to expand...
pocahontas-wave.gif
 
Iced Arcade

Iced Arcade

Member
I've been mostly pro acquisition but there is some positive to think of even if you don't like Xbox.

- apple, amazon, google etc can't come in a swoop up Activision. They don't have a strong footing in gaming so they wouldn't have faced the same scrutiny purchasing Activision to make it exclusive.

- it's remaining on PS and coming back to Nintendo consoles.

- more competition between Xbox and PS is better for gamers instead of one side being too comfortable (Sony with the PS3 was the best strong fighting Sony). And Xbox getting knocked off its 360 pedestal with the launch of Xbo humbled them (started building up 1st party studios and creation of gamepass).

- Sony isn't going to sit back and let MS have the biggest game on their platform and hopefully some fan favorite reemerge like socom.

- Sony will probably do the same and buy another big publisher which will prevent it being snatched up by Apple, Amazon etc. Someone like T2 or EA will some with the same conditions as Activision keeping those games on the other platforms... T2, EA's purchase price wouldn't be worth it for a company if the intent was to make them exclusive. both filled with sports games that carry licensing to remain on all platforms. (GTA would come under the same scope as COD).



Just some random thoughts. it's not all doom and gloom.
 
W

wolffy66

Member
poppabk said:
The question (which may never be answered) is did Sony waiting to the 11th hour allow them to negotiate a better deal or did they accept a worse deal to avoid being left out in the cold.
Click to expand...
You'd think they wouldn't be a generous due to Sony causing this much grief.
 
tryDEATH

tryDEATH

Member
This marks the end of this whole ordeal as all the big players in gaming have got deals for CoD from Nvidia, to Nintendo, and now PS. I didn't expect MS to offer Sony a deal at this point as the exclusive angle wasn't a deal breaker to anyone, but I do believe Xbox got ton out of this deal. I wouldn't be surprised if they changed the marketing deal that Sony has now and potentially even renegotiated the profit split as precedent exists of a 80/20 split that Xbox was forced to agree too, which MS could force onto Sony now.
 
poppabk

poppabk

Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
Gambit2483 said:
Because the gaming community has seen what MS has done to their favorite IPs over the years and are well aware of their "buy out the competition" practices and how that can negatively affect the industry.

Whereas the "Average gamer" could give a shit as long as they can get their
quick dopamine fix from the latest/hottest F2P mobile game.
Click to expand...
Flight Sim going from strength to strength, continuous support with free upgrades for years. Just check out the Maverick update - multiple new planes, altitude time trials, a whole recreation of the scramjet mission, training missions - cost $0. Ace Combat 7 Maverick update - 5 new planes and some call signs - cost $20.
AoE still going strong with AoE4 release, even though the market for RTS isn't as strong as it once was.
Yes I have seen what they have done with some of my favorite IP's and I am pretty excited for the future.
 
D

DeltaPolarBear

Member
Iced Arcade said:
- more competition between Xbox and PS is better for gamers instead of one side being too comfortable (Sony with the PS3 was the best strong fighting Sony). And Xbox getting knocked off its 360 pedestal with the launch of Xbo humbled them (started building up 1st party studios and creation of gamepass).
Click to expand...
You are outright wrong. Xbox not competing is not solved by punishing other gamers.
Xbox not competing is the fault of Xbox being a badly run company, and usually that kind of company dies and get replaced by BETTER competition. You make it sound like competition is about everyone getting first place which is the opposite of competition. There is no competition if the losing side was not allowed to FAIL.

Xbox is still around as a zombie business because of external money, thus stopping better competition from showing up. You are not fooling anyone.
 
Chukhopops

Chukhopops

Member
Timberwolf25 said:
I wonder how many of the people accusing Phil of lying under oath and that he would be taking COD away feel now that a binding agreement has been signed.
Click to expand...
My estimate is zero, since no one will see the deal people will say it’s worded in a way that allows MS to do whatever they want with the IP.
 
Last edited:
A

ActusReusJB

Member
I wonder if Jim Ryan now regrets not striking that new CoD deal when Bobby came for one right after acquisition announcement. Would be interesting to see the differences between them. He could have signed something preventing CoD on Game Pass when this whole started…but it would have weakened his case against the merger. Hindsight is 20/20 but with the way things planned out this was probably the largest error that occurred on Jim Ryan’s watch. He must have felt very strongly that the deal would be blocked, or that the concessions would be greater than where things ended up.
 
ToadMan

ToadMan

Member
GHG said:
It's unfathomable to me that both Sony and Nintendo have been willing to do deals with these serpents.

Personally I'd do everything in my power to ensure they've just lit a torch under 70 billion dollars, but that's just me and I'm petty like that.
Click to expand...

So Phil's words "under Oath" really were meaningless? After all a "binding contract" was necessary it turns out, to get CoD on PS going forwards...

But I guess it's a sigh of relief for both parties here - Sony wants the player-base to stay put, and MS needs to show sales money rolling in from the acquisition 'cos GP money ain't gonna light up the financials.
 
GHG

GHG

Gold Member
POKEYCLYDE said:
Didn't expect that after everything with the FTC.
Click to expand...

If you look at it purely from a mathematical perspective (as it stands today) it's all very symbiotic. Unfortunately they both need each other.

If Microsoft were to remove COD from PlayStation then they would be fucking themselves out of a lot of money that will be required to sustain the publisher/studios they have just purchased (along with potentially partially funding any future COD releases on gamepass). On the other hand if Sony refuse COD on Playstation moving forwards then it could have significant ramifications from a user retention and revenue perspective.

Now it can be argued that Microsoft would be able to ride the wave financially in the event that COD didn't continue to release on Playstation, but even still that would require a writedown of recently acquired assets and it would put the future scope of the franchise under jeopardy (budgets for future COD titles would shrink).

As with anything, the situation will evolve over time and I think that the situation will eventually be hevaily skewed in Microsoft's favour, at which point they can rug-pull COD from other platforms without notice. So essentially all of this plays perfectly into Microsoft's hands, which is why I've said what I said above. Given the situation as it is today, if I'm Sony I would have made them really sweat.

Knock Out Work GIF
 
Last edited:
Ar¢tos

Ar¢tos

Member
tryDEATH said:
This marks the end of this whole ordeal as all the big players in gaming have got deals for CoD from Nvidia, to Nintendo, and now PS. I didn't expect MS to offer Sony a deal at this point as the exclusive angle wasn't a deal breaker to anyone, but I do believe Xbox got ton out of this deal. I wouldn't be surprised if they changed the marketing deal that Sony has now and potentially even renegotiated the profit split as precedent exists of a 80/20 split that Xbox was forced to agree too, which MS could force onto Sony now.
Click to expand...
COD development costs aren't sustainable without Playstation sales due to install base. They'll basically give Sony whatever they want to keep the game on PlayStation, they can't just pull out. Xbox division is not setting any fires with their financial reports.
 
O

Ozriel

M$FT
poppabk said:
The question (which may never be answered) is did Sony waiting to the 11th hour allow them to negotiate a better deal or did they accept a worse deal to avoid being left out in the cold.
Click to expand...

You don’t offer better deals when you’re on the cusp of winning.

Sony’s already gotten a great deal from this.
1. Sharing formula for COD revenue reverts to 70/30, not 80/20 that Activision demanded, so Sony makes more money.

2. Microsoft already committed to full parity, so no special skins or map exclusivity etc for Xbox

Looks like a win-win
 
feynoob

feynoob

Gold Member
Ar¢tos said:
COD development costs aren't sustainable without Playstation sales due to install base. They'll basically give Sony whatever they want to keep the game on PlayStation, they can't just pull out. Xbox division is not setting any fires with their financial reports.
Click to expand...
One simple answer.
MTX.
Both Sony and MS need that money.
 
kvltus lvlzvs

kvltus lvlzvs

Banned

kungfuian said:
My personal musings- I'd imagine we see call of duty on Playstation up until the launch of the next hardware.

Taking the PS software cash in now while transitioning as many as they can to game pass and their ecosystem over the next few years makes a lot of sense. On top of not wanting to raise even more red flags with the regulatory bodies or cut off the money coming in, they won't want to decrease the population of COD players. Doing that mid generation means you would have lots of people that drop off that game because they were already playing on their PlayStations. Such a move could irreparably damage the player base and the call of duty brand. Better to move as many of those players over to other platforms first before cutting off the spigot. Timing-wise I'd imaginate a full switch with call of duty as an exclusive at the launch of their next game pass box.

And of course blame Sony because Sony didn't give them access to their new PlayStation 6 hardware or didn't accept some s*** terms like having game pass on PlayStation required for people to play it.

If/when the deal passes PlayStation will definitely need to be working double time to entice call of duty players away from that game and on to something new or they will lose a lot of money. I think to protect their business they'll need to buy take two or epic or something equivalent. They will need a Grand theft Auto or fortnite sized GAAS exclusive to make up for what will otherwise be a mass Exodus of casuals next gen. Although picking up Capcom and square would be more to my personal liking, they are going to have to make a large purchase for sure.

I do think it's worth mentioning that Microsoft will very likely mismanage the hell out of Activision Blizzard so call of duty will naturally be on a decline in popularity as their new corporate overlords f*** it up somehow. As much as I dislike Bobby he and his teams know how to turn out pretty solid games. Microsoft on the opposite side seem to be getting worse in this department and I wouldn't be surprised to see them turn COD into the next Halo level failure. They'll do something stupid only their greedy corporate asses know how to do like replace a ton of developers at thosd studios with remote worker temps to save money, like they did with Halo, and then watch it all go to s*** and wonder why their greed hasn't paid off.

One thing's for sure, if they are going to let Microsoft buy up large chunks of the industry with little to no restrictions and Sony seems to be going the same direction with a bunch of gaas b******* they can both f*** off. I'm going to go 100% steam/Nintendo at that point.
Click to expand...
After the thermonuclear Vidya corporate buyout wars, when nothing else is left standing, Nintendo will still be there, sitting amongst the ashes, having fun with their toys (and issuing dmca takedowns)
 
GHG

GHG

Gold Member
Ar¢tos said:
COD development costs aren't sustainable without Playstation sales due to install base. They'll basically give Sony whatever they want to keep the game on PlayStation, they can't just pull out. Xbox division is not setting any fires with their financial reports.
Click to expand...

Yep, considering they are now the division that has made the biggest acquisition in the company's history they are about to come under heavy scrutiny from shareholders moving forwards.

The pressure is about to get dialed up to 100.

Show Me The Money GIF
 
Last edited:
Timberwolf25

Timberwolf25

Member
Kilau said:
I wonder how the Xbox fans that want MS to pull CoD from PS feel now?
Click to expand...
I don't think most wanted COD pulled from PS, but rather having it added to GamePass instead.
Having COD on more platforms is good even for Xbox players because it gives them a bigger playerbase to play with. I'm not a COD PVP player though so maybe I'm wrong on this since I only really ever played it way back in the day for the campaign.
I do want to play Diablo 4 and will wait for it to come to GP.
 
Last edited:
O

Ozriel

M$FT
kungfuian said:
My personal musings- I'd imagine we see call of duty on Playstation up until the launch of the next hardware.

Timing-wise I'd imaginate a full switch with call of duty as an exclusive at the launch of their next game pass box.

And of course blame Sony because Sony didn't give them access to their new PlayStation 6 hardware or didn't accept some s*** terms like having game pass on PlayStation required for people to play it.
Click to expand...

This post is entirely bereft of logic. A binding, 10 year commitment puts us well into the middle of the next generation, since the PS6 is likely 4-5 years away.

Delays in issuing devkits will at worst be an issue for the very first next gen version of COD, but it’s not hard to provide broad performance targets, and dev kits can easily be issued ahead of console launch when competing hardware is already set in stone.

I wish you people would put some more thought into your conspiracy theories. This one is just plain bananas.
 
Iced Arcade

Iced Arcade

Member
DeltaPolarBear said:
You are outright wrong. Xbox not competing is not solved by punishing other gamers.
Xbox not competing is the fault of Xbox being a badly run company, and usually that kind of company dies and get replaced by BETTER competition. You make it sound like competition is about everyone getting first place which is the opposite of competition. There is no competition if the losing side was not allowed to FAIL.

Xbox is still around as a zombie business because of external money, thus stopping better competition from showing up. You are not fooling anyone.
Click to expand...
You need to work on those grief stages.

Maribeth Monroe Reaction GIF by CBS
 
tryDEATH

tryDEATH

Member
Ar¢tos said:
COD development costs aren't sustainable without Playstation sales due to install base. They'll basically give Sony whatever they want to keep the game on PlayStation, they can't just pull out. Xbox division is not setting any fires with their financial reports.
Click to expand...
No one said pull out, but they can strong arm Sony into a worse profit split such as the 80/20 split that Xbox was under. MS whole strategy from now on is to leech as many CoD PS gamers as possible and to shrink their play base so that in 5 or so years the games the split ends up significantly in favor on the Xbox platform, so that it becomes more financially viable to drop PS.
 
RGB'D

RGB'D

Member
GHG said:
It's unfathomable to me that both Sony and Nintendo have been willing to do deals with these serpents.

Personally I'd do everything in my power to ensure they've just lit a torch under 70 billion dollars, but that's just me and I'm petty like that.
Click to expand...
It's hardly as if MS is less ethical than Sony and Nintendo. At the end of the day, each company is only looking out for their own interests. For Nintendo that means gaining access to COD for the first time in years. Sony wants to ensure that their biggest moving game on their console does not get foreclosed.
 
Chukhopops

Chukhopops

Member
ActusReusJB said:
I wonder if Jim Ryan now regrets not striking that new CoD deal when Bobby came for one right after acquisition announcement. Would be interesting to see the differences between them. He could have signed something preventing CoD on Game Pass when this whole started…but it would have weakened his case against the merger. Hindsight is 20/20 but with the way things planned out this was probably the largest error that occurred on Jim Ryan’s watch. He must have felt very strongly that the deal would be blocked, or that the concessions would be greater than where things ended up.
Click to expand...
Would there even have been a FTC case if Sony had signed a deal? It was the best course of action at the time so I don’t blame them for trying.
 
GHG

GHG

Gold Member
Iced Arcade said:
You need to work on those grief stages.

Maribeth Monroe Reaction GIF by CBS
Click to expand...

He's not wrong though.

I see this sentiment all the time here about "competition", it's also rife in the Nvidia vs AMD discussions.

We don't want any old competition (as in company's that just exist for the sake of existing from a consumer perspective), we want competent and good competition. That is what truly benefits consumers, not some incompetent company shitting up the place with low standards and poor products. So in my opinion the only way this becomes good is if they let Bobby take the reigns and giving him licence to go full Peter Moore.
 
Last edited:
M

mayham2199

Member
Will be interesting to see what happens after this honestly whether the deal goes through or not. I’ve already gone back to PC gaming for a while but I did just recently get ff16 because I couldn’t wait. I don’t think GP is good for the industry but I’m also not convinced sub services will work for gaming as in be the new standard.

Gaming is not like tv/movies/music. Asking people to pay monthly for it imo is a much harder ask than the others. On top of which you have MS competing with others for it. Plus all the FTP games. Then just general subscription fatigue from the population. People are tired of paying monthly for everything. I’m not saying it can’t work just not convinced it will take over the industry.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Microsoft has Closed the Activision Blizzard King Deal
22 23 24 25 26
1K
76K
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
783
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