Support NeoGAF

[Topher]

The most interesting thing about that video (in my opinion) is that he's basically saying this is in a sense some sort of posturing/intimidation tactic by the FTC. Basically, they are hoping either Activision or MS walks away and just gives up. Activision would net a free 3 billion and I doubt MS would walk away from it.

No, Microsoft would have to have the distinct impression that there are going to lose before they did that. Microsoft knows if they are patient enough then they will prevail in this thing. FTC can throw up all the roadblocks they want, but ultimately it seems obvious to me that a federal court will side with Microsoft.

 

[R3claimer117]

Those are not the CMA's views.

For your sake I hope it’s not the side they come down on as that is what they’re publishing. Cause the amount of victory Laps you guys have taking be funny if senjustsu is taking a piss on you lot after this is over.

 

[Topher]

For your sake I hope it’s not the side they come down on as that is what they’re publishing. Cause the amount of victory Laps you guys have taking be funny if senjustsu is taking a piss on you lot after this is over.

Imagine being able to discuss a subject and having diverse thoughts on it at the same time. I've been saying this acquisition was going to go through from the beginning so what "you lot" are you talking about?

 

[Pelta88]

Yeah, I'm sure the CMA will publish every piece of feedback they have received and not those that are interesting to them.
This kind of drive by postings by people like you are running this forum to the ground.

A person posting their thoughts and opinions on a public discussion forum should elicit this type of response. If my, or any of our musings and armchair analysis, ruffles your feathers to this degree, mute or block.

Just don't vent like someone hurt you, personally.

 

[R3claimer117]

"In 40 years, the FTC has never lost an appeal of its own decision"

Lol not saying what you think he’s saying. He means an appeal to themselves. He clearly stated they lost to their own administration judges multiple times. They’ve lost in federal court 6 times recently they’ll lose to meta in 2 weeks and in the summer to Supreme Court as well so keep up the wishful thinking.

 

[DarkMage619]

You keep asking for proof when I've already stated there is none. Not sure why that isn't sinking in.

Prior to Morrowind, Bethesda was predominantly a PC game publisher/developer. Prior to Starfield, Bethesda had years of publishing/developing games for consoles including PlayStation. False equivalence.

I'll agree that it is certainly possible that Microsoft paid for exclusivity for Starfield though. Outside of that, do you really think Starfield was not going to be on PlayStation if MS had not bought Bethesda? Be honest with yourself.

We are talking about the same company in Bethesda so it's not false equivalence seeing how the business is dynamic. My point was past is not prologue. We have no proof of what games will end up anywhere.

Being honest with myself it's clear that if MS wants to guarantee a game they will more than likely need to pay for it because they cannot rely on market position to secure anything. Bottom line is PlayStation is still receiving support from Bethesda despite being owned by MS and will probably continue on a case by case basis.

Stop reading with your ears

Start thinking with your brain.

 

[Three]

Who's the company?

Probably begins with N.

 

[R3claimer117]

MS is getting roasted.

Lol he clearly didn’t read Microsoft’s 100 plus pages they took apart the cma and Sony’s arguments. That guy is biased against Microsoft no surprise.

 

[Topher]

Lol not saying what you think he’s saying. He means an appeal to themselves. He clearly stated they lost to their own administration judges multiple times. They’ve lost in federal court 6 times recently they’ll lose to meta in 2 weeks and in the summer to Supreme Court as well so keep up the wishful thinking.

Did I say what I was thinking about it? Nope. I did a couple of posts down though.

Did you see the part where he talks about appeals? This is damn weird and I never realized it. If the administrative law judge rules against the FTC then the FTC can appeal. That appeal goes to.......the FTC commission. After that, Microsoft can appeal in federal court.

lol.....we are going to be here a while folks

Being honest with myself it's clear that if MS wants to,,,

Dude....I'm not going to bother replying to you any longer on this. It is just a waste of time.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Start thinking with your brain.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Lol he clearly didn’t read Microsoft’s 100 plus pages they took apart the cma and Sony’s arguments. That guy is biased against Microsoft no surprise.

Hush little fanboy don't say a word, uncle phil's gonna buy you a mockingbird

 

[reksveks]

Spoiler: Spoiler

means f all but seriously MS just give nvidia the ability to stream MS games via Steam or the MS store. Gives me AoE on a streaming service and you are still getting the windows server license fees

 

[Topher]

Lol he clearly didn’t read Microsoft’s 100 plus pages they took apart the cma and Sony’s arguments. That guy is biased against Microsoft no surprise.

The guy is complimenting a paper written in defense of Microsoft's position. You are calling that guy "biased against Microsoft"? Are you serious?

 

[DeepEnigma]

The guy is complimenting a paper written in defense of Microsoft's position. You are calling that guy "biased against Microsoft"? Are you serious?

Some are so far gone.

 

[adamsapple]

Probably begins with N.

I've been on the internet long enough to know where this is going

 

[Topher]

Some are so far gone.

He's got to be drunk. It's five o'clock somewhere....

 

[R3claimer117]

Hush little fanboy don't say a word, uncle phil's gonna buy you a mockingbird

Saids the guy who’s avatar is wearing a Sony hat calling a me a fanboy I’m not corporate schill like you or the others I actually don’t care for fanboy nonsense. I’d rather engage in substantive discussion rather than company x shouldn’t have this because I’m in love with company S.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Is this dude having a mini meltdown and not capable of grasping jokes?

 

[Topher]

Saids the guy who’s avatar is wearing a Sony hat calling a me a fanboy I’m not corporate schill like you or the others I actually don’t care for fanboy nonsense. I’d rather engage in substantive discussion rather than company x shouldn’t have this because I’m in love with company S.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I’d rather engage in substantive discussion

I could really tell you were interested in engaging in a discussion with Topher with that unhinged response

 

[akimbo009]

MS don't do things without a purpose.
This deal took a lot of planing. Nothing happens without a coincidence. Especially, when you have a $68b purchase.

Yeah, they have a purpose... To grow Azures business in Fintech at one of the world's largest trading firms. It's not to bribe the UK. If anything, the trading platforms are even more heavily regulated and heavily scrutinized. Putting their business at risk for their video game division is just not at all likely.

 

[Ezekiel_]

Probably begins with N.

Too bad they're not in the same sub-market

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Too bad they're not in the same sub-market

I love this high-performance post

 

[akimbo009]

Saids the guy who’s avatar is wearing a Sony hat calling a me a fanboy I’m not corporate schill like you or the others I actually don’t care for fanboy nonsense. I’d rather engage in substantive discussion rather than company x shouldn’t have this because I’m in love with company S.

You should just ignore him. He's a troll and is always like this.

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

You should just ignore him. He's a troll and is always like this.

I aint no troll

 

[mansoor1980]

let us end this

the merger aint gonna happen for two years , so PEACE

 

[DeepEnigma]

Saids the guy who’s avatar is wearing a Sony hat calling a me a fanboy I’m not corporate schill like you or the others I actually don’t care for fanboy nonsense. I’d rather engage in substantive discussion rather than company x shouldn’t have this because I’m in love with company S.

You should just ignore him. He's a troll and is always like this.

Y'all take shit too seriously. This is going to be a long ass 2 years, so lighten up and enjoy the jokes and memes or you're gonna age faster than Phil Spencer and his PR.

 

[adamsapple]

let us end this

the merger aint gonna happen for two years , so PEACE

 

[akimbo009]

Y'all take shit too seriously. This is going to be a long ass 2 years, so lighten up and enjoy the jokes and memes or you're gonna age faster than Phil Spencer and his PR.

I am light, I'm a damn weather balloon just giving a little sanity guidance to others.

 

[bender]

I aint no troll

 

[adamsapple]

I aint no troll

That sounds like something a troll would say

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

I'm being victimized because of my hat

Help me mods

 

[Banjo64]

Most of this is defending Zenimax exclusivity and pushing that Xbox honored their commitments and promises, which makes me believe the Zenimax issue is the wedge that's the biggest concern to Microsoft right now as it's being used against them as an example of them breaking promises.

Using Starfield and Redfall as examples, their defense boils down to that both those games are new IP, they aren't established, have no-preexisting sales or revenue, or association with PlayStation, therefore making both games exclusive to Xbox/PC would have no impact on Sony by excluding a PS5 release for these games, and they are not taking away content from other gaming communities, but expanding them. They also use an older quote from Phil in 2020 showing they would take a look at releasing Zenimax games on other platforms by a case-by-case basis.

The tidbits about COD are retreading what we've already seen, so it's really the Zenimax defense that is the focus here.

Pretty simple but if they’re being honest about this they could end all debate here and now by saying TES, Fallout and Doom will continue to be released on PlayStation.

 

[Topher]

I am light, I'm a damn weather balloon just giving a little sanity guidance to others.

That dude needs a bit more than “sanity guidance”

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

just giving a little sanity guidance to others.

Then have I got the perfect video game console for you

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

let us end this

the merger aint gonna happen for two years , so PEACE

This gif would be perfect if that dirty green hat was blue

This is why I keep a knife in my pants

 

[bentanchorbolt]

Spoiler: Spoiler

means f all but seriously MS just give nvidia the ability to stream MS games via Steam or the MS store. Gives me AoE on a streaming service and you are still getting the windows server license fees

ELI5 please

 

[Topher]

Spoiler: Spoiler

means f all but seriously MS just give nvidia the ability to stream MS games via Steam or the MS store. Gives me AoE on a streaming service and you are still getting the windows server license fees

"Timing is key"

 

[SenjutsuSage]

This is an interesting read but comes off again as disingenuous. They made sure to include every talking point that helps their cast but again omitted the one where they state they had no incentive to make future games exclusive. There is a reason they keep ignoring that talking point.

Please find such a statement. At no stage did Microsoft ever say such a thing about "future" games, and you nor anyone else can find such a thing anywhere. They said they had no incentive to cease or to limit making Zenimax games available for purchase on rival consoles. This doesn't mean ALL future Zenimax games. It means ANY Zenimax game period, but most especially existing Zenimax games already available to rival consoles.

Can you today buy Doom Eternal or Doom 2016 on playstation consoles? Can you today buy Deathloop and Ghostwire Tokyo on a PS5. Can you today buy Fallout 76, Elder Scrolls Online, Skyrim Anniversary, Fallout 4 on Playstation consoles? Do the games continue receiving content or feature updates in line with their xbox console counterparts? The answer is yes to every single question.

As such, nothing Microsoft told the European Commission is in conflict with its actions.

You're busy focusing on section 114 of the EC's decision, shown here. This is quite clearly NOT talking about future games.

But why are people ignoring that the European Commission just two pages later on page 24 (go read it yourself https://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases1/202124/m10001_438_3.pdf) point out what Microsoft told them in its Form CO about its strategy for future Zenimax games, meaning Starfield, Redfall etc. Pay extra attention to the footnotes 125, 126, 127 and 128. Those footnotes are for the Form CO Microsoft provided to the EC about its strategy behind the transaction. Call it a "talking point"if you want, but it's true. Microsoft isn't the only one pointing to Microsoft's remarks about future Zenimax games, the EC highlights in its decision that it is aware of Microsoft's intent to decide what future games go to rival consoles on a case by case basis.

Here is Microsoft showing what it told the EC about future games.

The European Commission specifically referenced Microsoft's statements on future Zenimax games SEPARATE from Microsoft's communications about its incentive not to cease or limit making Zenimax Games available for sale on rival consoles post-transaction. There isn't a single game that was available for purchase on Playstation consoles before the transaction that is now somehow not available for purchase on playstation consoles. That is what Microsoft meant.

They also made zero commitments to putting its games on Sony's rival multi-game subscription, and yet there are Zenimax games available right now on PS Plus.

Now back to just occasionally lurking to see if any new info is put up, but had to challenge that blatantly inaccurate remark lol.

 

[Topher]

Please find such a statement. At no stage did Microsoft ever say such a thing about "future" games, and you nor anyone else can find such a thing anywhere. They said they had no incentive to cease or to limit making Zenimax games available for purchase on rival consoles. This doesn't mean ALL future Zenimax games. It means ANY Zenimax game period, but most especially existing Zenimax games already available to rival consoles.

Can you today buy Doom Eternal or Doom 2016 on playstation consoles? Can you today buy Deathloop and Ghostwire Tokyo on a PS5. Can you today buy Fallout 76, Elder Scrolls Online, Skyrim Anniversary, Fallout 4 on Playstation consoles? Do the games continue receiving content or feature updates in line with their xbox console counterparts? The answer is yes to every single question.

As such, nothing Microsoft told the European Commission is in conflict with its actions.

You're busy focusing on section 114 of the EC's decision, shown here. This is quite clearly NOT talking about future games.

But why are people ignoring that the European Commission just two pages later on page 24 (go read it yourself https://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases1/202124/m10001_438_3.pdf) point out what Microsoft told them in its Form CO about its strategy for future Zenimax games, meaning Starfield, Redfall etc. Pay extra attention to the footnotes 125, 126, 127 and 128. Those footnotes are for the Form CO Microsoft provided to the EC about its strategy behind the transaction. Call it a "talking point"if you want, but it's true. Microsoft isn't the only one pointing to Microsoft's remarks about future Zenimax games, the EC highlights in its decision that it is aware of Microsoft's intent to decide what future games go to rival consoles on a case by case basis.

Here is Microsoft showing what it told the EC about future games.

The European Commission specifically referenced Microsoft's statements on future Zenimax games SEPARATE from Microsoft's communications about its incentive not to cease or limit making Zenimax Games available for sale on rival consoles post-transaction. There isn't a single game that was available for purchase on Playstation consoles before the transaction that is now somehow not available for purchase on playstation consoles. That is what Microsoft meant.

They also made zero commitments to putting its games on Sony's rival multi-game subscription, and yet there are Zenimax games available right now on PS Plus.

Now back to just occasionally lurking to see if any new info is put up, but had to challenge that blatantly inaccurate remark lol.

“Limit making”. The word “making” means exactly that.

 

[feynoob]

Yeah, they have a purpose... To grow Azures business in Fintech at one of the world's largest trading firms. It's not to bribe the UK. If anything, the trading platforms are even more heavily regulated and heavily scrutinized. Putting their business at risk for their video game division is just not at all likely.

Man, we are just gamers. Don't expect us to know about these business deals.

 

[feynoob]

Getting roasted by getting support from other companies ?

weird flex but ok Fey

10page seems to do better job than 110 page.

I would be ashamed of myself, if someone did my job in easier way.

 

[Banjo64]

Nobody:



Absolutely nobody:



Somebody:

 

[adamsapple]

10page seems to do better job than 110 page.

I would be ashamed of myself, if someone did my job in easier way.

The 110 page is probably a massive lawyer document breaking down every point.

The 10 point makes it more attractive to the general reader, the 110 page is primarily meant for the regulators.

 

[feynoob]

The guy is complimenting a paper written in defense of Microsoft's position. You are calling that guy "biased against Microsoft"? Are you serious?

Some people need a grade school again.
How can you even twist his words like that?

 

[SenjutsuSage]

“Limit making”. The word “making” means exactly that.

Actually, it doesn't. 2 pages later the EC makes multiple references to what Microsoft said about its future strategy regarding Zenimax games including future games such as Starfield, Redfall etc. I know you're not blind.

 

[DarkMage619]

Pretty simple but if they’re being honest about this they could end all debate here and now by saying TES, Fallout and Doom will continue to be released on PlayStation.

They should clearly state what will happen with CoD. For Bethesda titles they said case by case basis.

 

[nikolino840]

Lol he clearly didn’t read Microsoft’s 100 plus pages they took apart the cma and Sony’s arguments. That guy is biased against Microsoft no surprise.

 

[SenjutsuSage]

They should clearly state what will happen with CoD. For Bethesda titles they said case by case basis.

Microsoft did state what will happen with COD. New games will be on Playstation as long as a Playstation exists. 10 year commitment. Microsoft hasn't broken a single contract. The fact Microsoft honored Deathloop commitment and continues to honor the Ghostwire commitment is proof enough Microsoft can be taken at its word on Call of Duty. The legal arguments for blocking this simply won't hold up in a court of law, which is why I can't wait for that part of the process.

The FTC likely thought they had it all figured out and they could stall it until they an appeal of their own decision in an appeals court, except there's this.

Case is expected to be decided June 2023. This right here already sounds like 5 justices are already prepared to rule against the FTC's administrative law process. There's no way Clarence Thomas is siding with the court's liberals on an issue that can directly target a Biden FTC that now has such a high profile attempt at blocking the Microsoft transaction going. Even Elena Kagan sounds skeptical of the government's side of the argument.

Based on this reading of the hearings in Axon vs FTC, it sounds like judges Alito, Roberts, Gorsuch, kagan (this would be a shocker), and kavanaugh are all about to rule against the FTC. Clarence Thomas regardless of what Kagan does is likely to side with the other conservative judges. I don't see Coney Barrett siding with the court liberals either. So at worst 5 judges are against the FTC, at best 7 judges are against the FTC. June 2023 I will be shocked if Microsoft doesn't officially have an out from the FTC's internal process and is able to successfully force it to court. At that point the FTC can decide whether it wants to keep fighting or not, but I don't see Microsoft dropping the deal with such a major factor potentially playing in its favor, especially if the EC and CMA end up approving the transaction.

https://www.scotusblog.com/2022/11/...ng-up-early-challenges-to-agency-proceedings/

 

[Ass of Can Whooping]

Actually, it doesn't. 2 pages later the EC makes multiple references to what Microsoft said about its future strategy regarding Zenimax games including future games such as Starfield, Redfall etc. I know you're not blind.

Another one who reads with his ears